@article {sucheras-marx_coccolith_2022,
	title = {Coccolith size rules {\textendash} What controls the size of coccoliths during coccolithogenesis?},
	journal = {Marine Micropaleontology},
	volume = {170},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {102080},
	abstract = {Heterococcoliths are calcite platelets produced inside diploid coccolithophore cells and extruded to form a covering on the cell surface called a coccosphere. The size of coccoliths is an important parameter sometimes used to identify species, and it is observed to be influenced in extant species by abiotic parameters (e.g., CO2, light). However, the variable distribution of coccolith sizes occurring within a single coccosphere questions the mechanisms controlling coccolith size. A relationship between cell/coccosphere size and mean coccolith size was previously identified, called the {\textquotedblleft}coccolithophore size rules{\textquotedblright}. In this study, we query the mechanisms controlling the size of a coccolith during coccolithogenesis. A culture experiment on Gephyrocapsa huxleyi strain RCC1216 shows that coccolithogenesis occurs during the cell growth G1 interphase and newly produced coccoliths get bigger as the cell grows. These observations provide parameters for the development of two numerical models used to simulate the coccolith size distribution within a coccolithophore population. Neither model can accurately reproduce an empirical monoclonal coccolith size distribution, indicating that additional factors influence coccolith size. According to our results, coccolith size is only clearly related to cell size at the time of its formation. We confirm that application of the coccolithophore size rules model should be limited to inferring average cell dimensions from (fossil) coccolith biometry, and that comparisons are valid only in multipopulational studies. The coccolith size rule model {\textendash} the constraining effect of coccolith production during G1 interphase cell growth on coccolith size {\textendash} proposed here is applicable only for some placolith-forming species.},
	keywords = {Biometry, coccolith, coccolithophore, life cycle, RCC1216, Size variation},
	issn = {0377-8398},
	doi = {10.1016/j.marmicro.2021.102080},
	url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377839821001213},
	author = {Such{\'e}ras-Marx, Baptiste and Viseur, Sophie and Walker, Charlotte E. and Beaufort, Luc and Probert, Ian and Bolton, Clara}
}
@article {langer_role_2021,
	title = {Role of silicon in the development of complex crystal shapes in coccolithophores},
	journal = {New Phytologist},
	volume = {231},
	number = {5},
	year = {2021},
	note = {_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/nph.17230},
	pages = {1845{\textendash}1857},
	abstract = {The development of calcification by the coccolithophores had a profound impact on ocean carbon cycling, but the evolutionary steps leading to the formation of these complex biomineralized structures are not clear. Heterococcoliths consisting of intricately shaped calcite crystals are formed intracellularly by the diploid life cycle phase. Holococcoliths consisting of simple rhombic crystals can be produced by the haploid life cycle stage but are thought to be formed extracellularly, representing an independent evolutionary origin of calcification. We use advanced microscopy techniques to determine the nature of coccolith formation and complex crystal formation in coccolithophore life cycle stages. We find that holococcoliths are formed in intracellular compartments in a similar manner to heterococcoliths. However, we show that silicon is not required for holococcolith formation and that the requirement for silicon in certain coccolithophore species relates specifically to the process of crystal morphogenesis in heterococcoliths. We therefore propose an evolutionary scheme in which the lower complexity holococcoliths represent an ancestral form of calcification in coccolithophores. The subsequent recruitment of a silicon-dependent mechanism for crystal morphogenesis in the diploid life cycle stage led to the emergence of the intricately shaped heterococcoliths, enabling the formation of the elaborate coccospheres that underpin the ecological success of coccolithophores.},
	keywords = {biomineralization, Calcification, coccolith, coccolithophore, evolution, rcc, RCC1178, RCC1181, RCC1456, RCC1460, RCC1461, RCC1477, RCC1800, RCC1801, RCC3777, RCC6506, silicon},
	issn = {1469-8137},
	doi = {10.1111/nph.17230},
	url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/nph.17230},
	author = {Langer, Gerald and Taylor, Alison R. and Walker, Charlotte E. and Meyer, Erin M. and Ben Joseph, Oz and Gal, Assaf and Harper, Glenn M. and Probert, Ian and Brownlee, Colin and Wheeler, Glen L.}
}
@article {Walker2018,
	title = {The requirement for calcification differs between ecologically important coccolithophore species},
	journal = {New Phytologist},
	volume = {in press},
	year = {2018},
	note = {tex.mendeley-tags: RCC1731},
	month = {jun},
	keywords = {Calcification, coccolithophore, Coccolithus braarudii, Emiliania huxleyi, phytoplankton, rcc1731},
	issn = {0028646X},
	doi = {10.1111/nph.15272},
	url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/nph.15272},
	author = {Walker, Charlotte E. and Taylor, Alison R. and Langer, Gerald and Durak, Gra{\.z}yna M. and Heath, Sarah and Probert, Ian and Tyrrell, Toby and Brownlee, Colin and Wheeler, Glen L.}
}
