The term "Cyanobacteria" is fine IF it does not separate you from the bulk of the literature concerning the blue-greens. It is currently considered the proper taxonomic designation of the creatures we are considering this week. . The value of terminology is that it helps us to communicate. Unfortunately, this clarification of terms does the opposite. Most of the work relating to blue-greens is published by phycologists (those who study "algae") and they tend to use the term algae rather indiscriminately. Yet, the name "Cyanobacteria" places the blue-greens in the realm of microbiologists (those who study "bacteria"), and microbiologists, for the most part, have never been very interested in blue-greens. Which means they publish relatively little about Cyanobacteria. An enormous amount of information has been published about blue-greens and most of it is in books/papers on "algae". If you are not aware of these terminological glitches (right or wrong is irrelevant here), you will miss that "bulk of the literature concerning the blue-greens."

The problem is that neither the word "algae" nor the word "bacteria" works very well in taxonomic terms. "Bacteria" lumps Archaea and Methanogens, and Archebacteria and Cyanobacteria into groups that have no real logic to their association (I hope we have been there just enough to convince you that care must be taken to gain the most from that part of the phylogeny of life. "Algae" makes strange groups on an even higher plane. It refers to organisms that include Prokaryotes and Eukaryotes, and, or, Monera, Protista, and Plantae. The blue-greens are definitely Prokaryotes, and, or Monera. The rest of the creatures we call "algae" are Eukaryotes. The morphologically complex (usually quite large) forms are often considered Plantae. For this year, anyway, the term "blue-greens" (strictly the vernacular) is suitable. The situation is actually worse than the above would indicate since. technically, the proper taxonomic identification of the blue-greens is Myxophyta. This is because nomenclature is very formal and the original name associated with a taxon takes precedence. Myxophyta was the original designation of the blue-greens. That original name is thoroughly confusing suggesting plants and slime molds, neither of which has much to do with blue-greens. Fortunately, it is almost never used (although - check Ward and Whipple!).

There are two fine books devoted to the blue-green algae about which you should know - just in case you need them in the future. They may strike you as "old", but there is nothing to replace them. Stewart’s Biochemistry of the Algae has slightly newer info. - not different info.

THE BIOLOGY OF BLUE-GREEN ALGAE (Ed. Carr and Whitton) 1972

THE BLUE-GREEN ALGAE (Ed. Fogg, Stewart, Fay, Walsby) 1973.

I have included several chapters from the above. Just in case you need some basic information on the b-g’s.

- Drouet, F. 1959. Myxophyceae. Edmondson, W. T. 1959. FRESH-WATER BIOLOGY, 2nd Ed. (Ward & Whipple) Chapt. 5. Myxophyceae is his Latin taxonomic designation for blue-greens (prokaryotes with a chlor-a based photosynthesis). This is one of the most functional taxonomic keys for blue-greens of which I know. Drouet changed his mind about this system. He ultimately "lumped" most of the Oscillatoriaceae into a few species. He will only examine a preserved, preferably dried, specimen!! No matter how you (or your boss) feel about it, taxonomy is not suited to general field study applications such as environmental impact studies. If you are ever forced to do a species survey which includes blue-greens, this chapter will genuinely salvage your reputation.

- Gantt, E. 1975. Phycobilisomes: Light-harvesting pigment complexes.

This is important to society in general. Much interest is, and will be, invested in the possible molecular manipulation of the bases for N-fixation. We not have much use for the slimy "blue-greens", but N-fixation is a rare talent and a most desirable one to ADD to crop plants.

Consider: N = protein ?

- Stewart, Haystead, Pearson. 1969. Nitrogenase activity in heterocysts of blue-green algae. Nature 224:226. (A classic) Proof of location (it has lately been shown that there are other locations for N-fixation).

Much of this material is mine, sorry. One paper, Maestrini and Bonin, is here partly because it is a good review (even with the date), but mostly because it tends to justify the peculiar absence of papers on aquatic allelochemistry. (I don't know Maestrini or Bonin). The Schwimmer and Schwimmer paper is for fun (but make sure you read it.) The review is an invited, reviewed, book chapter. If there were an extra week, there are some neat additional papers - but I'm biased.

* Schwimmer, D, and M. Schwimmer. 1964. Algae and medicine. Algae And Man (ed. D. Jackson) pp. 368-412. (For fun - makes great cocktail party conversation.)

* Maestrini and D. Bonin. 1981. Allelopathic relationships between phytoplankton species. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 210:323-338. (Just for the record, Dr. Maestrini is furious with me for not continuing this work. Really annoyed.)