• Rhodomonas baltica
References [2 ]
Costa RM da, Pereira LCC & Fern√°ndez F (2012) Deterrent effect of Gymnodinium catenatum Graham PSP-toxins on grazing performance of marine copepods. Harmful Algae 17: 75-82.
Zhang J, Ianora A, Wu C, Pellegrini D, Esposito F & Buttino I (2014) How to increase productivity of the copepod Acartia tonsa (Dana): Effects of population density and food concentration. Aquaculture Research -: 1-9.
Division/Phylum: Cryptophyta Class: Cryptophyceae Order: Pyrenomonadales

Note: for strains where we have DNA barcodes we can be reasonably confident of identity, however for those not yet sequenced we rely on morphology and the original identification, usually made by the depositor. Although CCAP makes every effort to ensure the correct taxonomic identity of strains, we cannot guarantee that a strain is correctly identified at the species, genus or class levels. On this basis users are responsible for confirming the identity of the strain(s) they receive from us on arrival before starting experiments.
For strain taxonomy we generally use AlgaeBase for algae and Adl et al. (2019) for protists.

Culture media, purity and growth conditions:
Medium:MASM; Bacteria present; maintained by serial subculture;
AuthorityKarsten 1898
IsolatorButcher (1961)
Collection Siterock pool Bordeaux Harbour, Guernsey, Channel Islands
Notes Reacquired from Kirstin Hoef Emden February 2016
Area Europe
Country UK
Environment Marine
Original Designation SB4.BC 26/9
Pathogen Not pathogenic: Hazard Class 1
Type Culture No
Equivalent StrainsCSIRO 201,CSIRO CS-201
Formerly Listed in CCAP asCryptomonas pseudobaltica Butcher 1967


Rhodomonas baltica

  • Product Code:CCAP979/9
  • Availability:In Stock