Microworld

world of amoeboid organisms

Menu

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa Penard, 1903

Diagnosis: Body naked, grayish, spherical or star-shaped, without a clear distinction between ectoplasm and endoplasm; surface with one or several large contractile vacuoles; cytoplasm containing small vacuoles and colorless brilliant grains. In the center of the plasm is a nucleus of unusually large size, very clearly drawn, with a very thick membrane, and filled with a nuclear juice with usually one nucleolus; sometimes two nucleoli are present.Nucleolus more or less spherical, normally with one or more small lacunae.
Pseudopodia radiating in all directions, rarely less numerous, most often in considerable numbers, straight and simple, or each branched into a certain number of filaments that deviate little from each other, thus taking together the appearance of a broom. These filaments bear mobile granules, very small and few in number (Original diagnosis, translated from French).

Dimensions: Penard (1903), central body 14-26 µm, my measurements: 22-31 µm. Nucleus 12-16 µm.

Ecology: Fresh water. In oligotrophic and mesotrophic watertypes, e.g. the Spiegelplas, a deep and large lake, and in the IJsselmeer near Kornwerderzand and in Crailoo, a mesotrophic pond, both in the Netherlands. It multiplied in wet mounts kept in humidity chambers. This species has also been found in the USA by Yana Eglit (2012, pers. comm.) and in Germany in a fresh water aquarium by Eckhard Voelcker (2015, pers. comm).

Remarks: The granules are very hard to detect, only with phase contrast they become more distinct. They are more numerous than Penard describes and they move in a bidirectional way. I have found this species several times. They came up in so called wet-chamber-mounts. The pseudopodia of my specimens differ from the ones described by Penard, but their nucleus fits well to his description. It is not unusual that amoeboids develop completely different pseudopodia when settled or attached to the slide. I have seen this phenomenon also with specimens of Clathrella foreli and Leptophrys-species.
Actinocoma ramosa is very sensitive to light. It reacts immediately when it comes within the light path of the microscope. It retracts its long pseudopodia and broad veils. What remains is a more or less spherical body with rod-like short pseudopodia moving and waving restlessly.
Penard (1903): “This curious body has the appearance of a heliozoaire, and would remind somewhat Actinophrys sol; by its branched pseudopodia and devoid of any axial filaments, it is an amoeboid rhizopod. It is still rare, and I found only a few individuals, at Point à la Bise, along the shore of the lake.”

Nucleus with two nucleoli. All specimens in a sample from Crailoo showed this phenomenon.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, just some seconds after coming into the light beam of the microscope. Note the veils.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, with relatively large ovoid nucleus and central nucleolus.

Actinocoma ramosa, with short and long pseudopodia. The short pseudopodia move continuously like waving sticks.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Pseudopodium with granules (arrow) in bi-directional movement.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, after Penard, 1903

Actinocoma ramosa

The same specimen as above.
Actinocoma ramosa
Actinocoma ramosa
Nucleus, 16 µm. Note the small vacuoles.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, drawing: Ferry Siemensma (1981)

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, dividing

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, the same specimens as above.

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, nucleus

Actinocoma ramosa

Actinocoma ramosa, Spiegelplas
actinocoma ramosa - Ferry Siemensma
Actinocoma ramosa - Ferry Siemensma
Small specimen with two nucleoli
Actinocoma ramosa
Actinocoma ramosa, river Gardon, France, 2019
Actinocoma ramosa
Actinocoma ramosa, river Gardon, France, 2019
Recent posts

Rhizaspis armata

R. armata, 68 µm long, excl. spines – Laegieskamp Rhizaspis armata (Lauterborn, 1901) Dumack et al., 2021 Basionym: Pamphagus armatum Lauterborn, 1890 Diagnosis: Theca membranous,

Read More »

Rhizaspis spinosa

The original description with original drawings, Penard, 1890. Rhizaspis spinosa (Penard, 1890) Dumack et al., 2021 Basionym: Trinema spinosum Penard, 1890 Diagnosis: Theca membranous, ovoid

Read More »

Difflugia “pseudoclaviformis”

Difflugia “pseudoclaviformis”, front and side view, 424 µm Difflugia “pseudoclaviformis” Diagnosis: Shell pyriform, compressed, with a more or less pronounced aboral protuberance; shell composed of

Read More »

Difflugia from Lolo Pass

Shells 461-448 µm, stacked image. I found this large en remarkable shells in sediment of a small mountain lake near Lolo Pass, Montana USA. It differs

Read More »

Foraminifer drome

Unknown species, collected from the river Drôme, France, 2021 Unknown species September 2021, I found about ten specimens of an agglutinated foraminifer in a sample

Read More »

Cyclopyxis spec

Cyclopyxis spec., 168 µm Cyclopyxis spec. Diagnosis: Shell circular in ventral and dorsal view, more or less hemispherical in lateral view (height/diameter ≈ 0.5); lateral

Read More »

Difflugia fallax

Difflugia fallax, from Penard, 1902 Difflugia fallax Penard, 1890 Diagnosis: Shell hyaline or yellowish-greenish, black at low magnification, round in cross section, formed of a

Read More »

Zivkovicia compressoidea

Z. compressoidea, a-b after Chardez, 1958; c after Jung, 1942 Zivkovicia compressoidea  (Jung, 1942) new.comb. Basionym: Pontigulasia compressoidea Jung, 1942 Diagnosis: Shell ovoid and compressed,

Read More »

Zivkovicia flexa

Z. flexa, from Cash and Hopkinson, 1909 Zivkovicia flexa  (Cash and Hopkinson, 1909) Ogden, 1983 Basionym: Pontigulasia compressa var. flexa  Cash and Hopkinson, 1909 Diagnosis:

Read More »