Pygsuia biforma Brown et al. 2013

Another one of the strange organisms I've been illustrating. I find the name funny because no matter how I look at it, it sounds like "pig." The name "biforma" is because it has two forms, indeed (obviously lol). Unlike Subulatomonas, which I was too lazy to illustrate, I actually illustrated both forms of P. biforma. I had it all ready when I realized a structure was missing and I had to redo it—what a pain!

Reminder (da f___ng reminder) that the images of the organism are free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0, non-commercial, attribution required (DOTkamina 2026).

If you've ever stumbled across this obscure site, you'll know I'm a ₗₐzy bᵤₘ, so I'll take advantage of the fact that this organism is also a breviate (like Subulatomonas tetraspora), and copy the exact same taxonomic description, varying it for Pygsuia biforma. I hope you can forgive me. Or well, never mind, I already did it before with cryptomonad algae. So, idc.

Pygsuia biforma is not in AlgaeBase, which surprised me. It is in NCBI Taxonomy. The organism belongs to the family Pygsuidae, order Breviatida, class Breviatea. The truth is, I've only found the name "Pygsuidae" on Wikipedia. NCBI Taxonomy directly includes P. biforma as part of Breviatea.

The class Breviatea, the breviate amoebas, are strange amoebas that lack mitochondria (instead, they have structures similar to them, as you'll see later), have two flagella, and a metabolic style adapted to low oxygen (anaerobic). They are unusual because their taxonomic placement is uncertain.

The class Breviatea is included in the clade Obazoa, a group of eukaryotes that also includes Apusomonadida (amoebas that do have mitochondria, although some have modifications that resemble those of Breviatea) (Torruella et al. 2018) and Opisthokonta (amoeboid eukaryotes that share the characteristic of moving with the aid of a single posterior flagellum. In contrast, Breviatea and Apusomonadida move with at least one anterior flagellum. Opisthokonta is notable for encompassing organisms related to the ancestors of animals and fungi, as well as the animals and fungi themselves).

Obazoa is grouped with Amoebozoa (the "common amoebas" as such) in the clade Amorphea or Unikonta (common characteristic: a single flagellum) (Spiegel 2016). Amorphea is included in the clade Podiata (which would include Amorphea and CRuMs). Podiata is finally included in the large domain Eukaryota, related to other clades I've already covered and others I hope to discuss later, such as Metamonada (Giardia lamblia) or Diaphoretickes (which includes Archaeplastida (plants and relatives of plant ancestors), Pancryptista (which includes cryptomonad algae), the SAR group, and so on)...

I have relied mainly on two articles for the creation of the illustrations of this organism, as well as for writing its description:

• "Phylogenomics demonstrates that breviate flagellates are related to opisthokonts and apusomonads". Matthew William Brown, Susan Sharpe, Jeffrey D. Silberman, Aaron A. Heiss, B. Franz Lang, Alastair Simpson, Andrew J. Roger. Proceedings of The Royal Society B. 280(1769):20131755. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2013.1755. 2013.
• "A SUF Fe-S Cluster Biogenesis System in the Mitochondrion-Related Organelles of the Anaerobic Protist Pygsuia". Courtney W. Stairs, Laura Eme, Matthew W. Brown, Cornelis Mutsaers, Edward Susko, Graham Dellaire, Darren M. Soanes, Mark van der Giezen, Andrew J. Roger. Current Biology. Vol. 4, Issue 11. 1176-1186 pp. 2014.

Well, this organism is certainly interesting. Uhm... I'm sure it won't seem so interesting to me once I explore its taxonomic relatives further. I've represented its two main forms: adherent and swimming.

In both forms, we can see that the organism has a nucleus (I assume it also has a nucleolus, but Brown et al. 2013 don't mention this organelle, so I've decided not to represent it); an elongated, double-membrane mitochondrial-related organelle (MRO) (usually only one) without obvious cristae, one end of which is close to the basal bodies; bacteria ingested in food vacuoles (I've represented two "morphs"—the more oval vacuoles are inspired by Brown et al. 2013, and the comma-shaped ones are based on the micrographs by Stairs et al. 2014); and starch-like granules (bodies), which Brown et al. (2013) mentions that there are "several," although only one is indicated and observed in the micrograph Figure 1 of that article... but I have depicted more. 

Of course, we mustn't forget the basal bodies (the structures that attach to the flagellar microtubules), which are at an obtuse angle. There is also a Golgi apparatus near the anterior end of the MRO. I have depicted it almost elongated, as can be seen in Brown et al. (2013): Figure 1e. Oh, and I almost forgot: there's also a "dorsal microtubular fan" (MDF), which surrounds the back of the anterior basal body and appears to continue close to the MRO (see Brown et al. 2013: Figure 1e). I could have sworn the MDF was visible in the image, but looking at it again, I've drawn it very thin... which is close to reality, but it's still not very noticeable at first glance. I apologize for any potential eye strain.

I almost forgot this too: the endoplasmic reticulum is speculatively shaped, and I assume it exists because it's a nearly ubiquitous structure in all eukaryotic cells. The rough endoplasmic reticulum has ribosomes (those light-colored, stuck-together dots in the image), but I assume ribosomes are also dispersed throughout the rest of the cell. The smooth endoplasmic reticulum doesn't have nearly as many ribosomes. In this illustration, as well as in all the previous ones of other organisms, I've always depicted the smooth endoplasmic reticulum as having shorter and somewhat wider bodies than the rough endoplasmic reticulum, but that's just my convention to try and make the difference more noticeable. In real life, both forms can be intertwined, have the same width, and not be noticeable as two completely separate structures. I think I should have included that caveat for the others as well.

That said, let's get to the morphs. The cell in its adherent form is pear-shaped. Dimensions: 8.5–18.5 mm long and 5–8 mm wide. It has two flagella. The anterior or apical flagellum is the longer one, 8 to 30 µm. The posterior flagellum is (usually) shorter, measuring less than the cell itself. It's inserted subapically and closely associated with the cell surface, hence why I've drawn it attached to the cell, in the region where the MRO would be underneath. Anatomically It's very likely that the spatial arrangement I've chosen for the illustration won't always be the case. 

When the cell is actively gliding in an adherent state, it develops prominent, filose pseudopodia, which form at the anterior end of the cell. For a moment, I was freaking out because in Brown et al. 2013: Figure 1a, more pseudopodia are shown not only at the anterior end but also along one side of the cell, extending to the posterior end. But apparently, pseudopodia can form at the posterior end and on the rest of the cell (Brown et al. 2013: Supplementary Data Figure S6 B). The only difference is that the posterior pseudopodia are more prominent and appear to be branched. I haven't represented that property because I just found out about it. And honestly, I don't think I'm going to make a new image representing that possible state. Sorry!

Finally, the other state is the swimming cell form. Here, the cell has a more rounded or elongated shape (not obviously pear-shaped; I depicted it as a somewhat narrow oval, but not quite pear-shaped). Cells in this form are 8.5–13 mm long and 3.7–5.3 mm wide. The anterior or apical flagellum is "long", 8.5–28 mm long, and inserted apically. The main difference lies in the posterior flagellum. In the adherent form, this was short and attached to the cell surface, but in the swimming form, the posterior flagellum is 50% longer than the anterior flagellum (16–37 mm long), and, although still directed posteriorly, it is more "free," meaning it is not as tightly attached to the cell surface.

That's really all there is to say about this organism. 

ヾ(^ ^ゞ

I hope this information and the images are helpful. Don't forget to give credit, and read the original articles where I got all this information if you want more technical details and so on. 

I'm signing off now 'cause I want to upload this to Wikimedia Commons quickly.

(∩♡°ω°)⊃

reload!

Well, I was a bit overwhelmed yesterday.

But I think it's time to move on. Life goes on, anyway.

I must build my legacy.

Look out for the next illustrations soon!

I hope to finish a book soon too; I really want to publish something written.

(づ ◕‿◕ )づ

ˢᵗᵃᵗⁱᶜ ˢᵒᵘˡ

I feel like I'm collapsing again. The pains in my side are coming back, and I think it's the gallstones they found more than six months ago.

I feel like I don't like looking in the mirror; I've started to hate them. It's something I have to say eventually. I look at myself and... no, I just don't like what I see. That's very negative, so I'll leave it at that because I'm not going to dwell on it any further.

I have immigration status issues. That's all I'm going to say, no more details. I'll just say that I feel like I'm experiencing all the problems and not "the good things about young adulthood," although I think that time is simply over. I live far away, I can't go to any clubs or have fun in any setting, my mom is permanently ill, etc. It's exhausting, and honestly, I think this life just isn't going to last anymore. So now... all I can do is hope that multiple lives exist and that I can do better in the next one.

You know? If there were another life, I'd like to remember all the mistakes I made in this one, all the bad decisions and attitudes that led me to become the gloomy, quiet, spineless, and cowardly boy I am today.

I wish I hadn't had such an inflated ego when I was told I was gifted. It went to my head and clashed with my shyness, ultimately isolating me even more because I simply couldn't keep up with the kids my age. I wish I had listened to that janitor who told me not to just train my mind, that my body is important too. Boy, was she right; she knew what she was talking about.

I wish I had been more likable. I've always been very quiet, and I've never tried to change that. Well, maybe I have, but either I've always encountered the worst people (teasing, humiliating, or misunderstandings), or I simply never kept up with the trends of that time, or even now. I promised myself I'd be more sociable, but I just can't. I feel awkward and artificial, and I think others notice it too because... in any situation, I always stand apart. I'm always the one trailing behind. Anyway, I don't have much to say. Or much to contribute, either.

I remember that friend I had in childhood who sometimes used to invite me over for sleepovers. Back then, I found her annoying; God knows what she was thinking or why. Eventually, she drifted away, and she's absolutely right. High school wasn't any better, but college was, and I had closer friends. The unsettling thing is that I'm not recalling any memories with nostalgia. I only briefly remember the experiences with (2)1(1)_11(2)-(2)1(1)-(3)1-11(1)1 and what that could have meant to me.

Yeah... I think so. I just hope to be more normal and do better in a future life.

What I have left now is to persevere and try to preserve my legacy. To imagine beautiful possible scenarios on the bus. Evoking moments from my current favorite anime, Class de 2-banme ni Kawaii Onnanoko to Tomodachi ni Natta.

...Hey, is there someone you really like? Well, tell them you like them. Seriously. It's going to hurt if they reject you, or if you know they're going to reject you, obviously. But it's true, better that than developing a grudge later that isn't even justified because that other person probably saw you as a friend, or a lackey, or however you want to see it. Do you want a friend or to be in a certain group of friends? Well... I don't have very good ideas for that. Try to immerse yourself in the other people's tastes or what they have in common. Of course, avoid those people who just seek pleasure in evil (stealing, smoking, doing drugs). Eventually, that destroys your liver, and believe me, you don't want to have a failing organ and have to give up the joys of life just to keep saving your own life in the hospital with the help of some machine.

I'll try to see if I can get out of this rut ​​and write something. I have to get up early tomorrow to keep sorting out my shitty problems.

Try not to overthink your problems.

If it gets too heavy, open up and play a video game. Or go to sleep. Or if that's really impossible, well, maybe writing into thin air, like I do, could be a good idea.

Good luck.

And good night.

Subulatomonas tetraspora L.Katz, J.Grant, L.W.Parfrey, A.Gant, C.O'Kelly, O.R.Anderson, R.E.Molestina & T.Nerad 2011

Aaaah, my mind feels foggy and my ribs are aching (not in the way you might imagine) because I just played Roblox's Hypershot game for about an hour, I think? But anyway, it's time to get back to doing something productive.

Reminder that the images of the organism are free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0, non-commercial, attribution required (DOTkamina 2026).

That said, I'll begin by providing the taxonomic context. Subulatomonas tetraspora is an unusual organism, in the sense that its position in the phylogeny was completely unfamiliar to me. In fact, on AlgaeBase it's listed as part of "Eukaryota unassigned," so it's playing coy. According to the English Wikipedia, the organism belongs to the family Breviatidae, order Breviatida, class Breviatea.

The class Breviatea, the breviate amoebas, are strange amoebas that lack mitochondria (instead, they have structures similar to them, as you'll see later), have two flagella, and a metabolic style adapted to low oxygen (anaerobic). They are unusual because their taxonomic placement is uncertain.

The class Breviatea is included in the clade Obazoa, a group of eukaryotes that also includes Apusomonadida (amoebas that do have mitochondria, although some have modifications that resemble those of Breviatea) (Torruella et al. 2018) and Opisthokonta (amoeboid eukaryotes that share the characteristic of moving with the aid of a single posterior flagellum. In contrast, Breviatea and Apusomonadida move with at least one anterior flagellum. Opisthokonta is notable for encompassing organisms related to the ancestors of animals and fungi, as well as the animals and fungi themselves).

Obazoa is grouped with Amoebozoa (the "common amoebas" as such) in the clade Amorphea or Unikonta (common characteristic: a single flagellum) (Spiegel 2016). Amorphea is included in the clade Podiata (which would include Amorphea and CRuMs). Podiata is finally included in the large domain Eukaryota, related to other clades I've already covered and others I hope to discuss later, such as Metamonada (Giardia lamblia) or Diaphoretickes (which includes Archaeplastida (plants and relatives of plant ancestors), Pancryptista (which includes cryptomonad algae), the SAR group, and so on)...

.............. And many more.

Fuck, I've barely scratched the surface of eukaryotic taxonomy.

ᕕ( ᐛ ) ᕗ

But anyway, back to Subulatomonas tetraspora. For the illustrations and the text here, I based them on a single article, which is where it is described in more detail: "Subulatomonas tetraspora nov. gen. nov. sp. is a Member of a Previously Unrecognized Major Clade of Eukaryotes", by Laura A. Katz, Jessica Grant, Laura Wegener Parfrey, Anastasia Gant, Charles J. O’Kelly, O. Roger Anderson, Robert E. Molestina and Thomas Nerad. Protist, Vol. 162, Issue 5. 762-773 pp. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protis.2011.05.002

The organism has several morphologies (amoeboid, gliding, swimming, settling), but I was too lazy to illustrate them all, to be honest. I opted for the gliding form, and that's the form I've depicted in the illustrations.

The organism has characteristics typical of a standard eukaryotic cell: a nucleus with a central nucleolus, and a Golgi apparatus (which in this organism is described as "small" and without observable microtubules in its region). The dimensions of the entire cell (without flagella or pseudopodia) are usually 5 to 10 µm long and 3 to 5 µm wide.

As I mentioned, it belongs to the class Breviatea, organisms that lack true mitochondria. S. tetraspora has what the authors believe are possibly "hydrogenosomes." There are a few of them, and they have a double membrane. Hydrogenosomes likely evolved from mitochondria. The difference is that they lack cristae (which should mean that no texture is visible inside them, but in S. tetraspora a texture is observed, which I have represented as darker areas within the hydrogenosomes), and they function in an anaerobic environment, releasing hydrogen (H2) as a waste product. 

S. tetraspora is microaerophilic btw (meaning it is not completely anaerobic, but requires very little oxygen to thrive; amounts close to normal are poisonous to it).

Another peculiar feature is the food vacuoles, which contain the remains of bacteria in the process of digestion, which is what they eat (I have represented these digesting bacteria as very dark and irregular areas within the food vacuoles). The unsettling thing is that there are also bacteria within the cytoplasm, free-floating (in the illustration I have labeled this "Bacteria"). I suppose these must be ingested bacteria that have not yet been incorporated into a food vacuole.

The endoplasmic reticulum has a speculative shape, and I represent it as such because I assume it exists in all eukaryotes except for exceptions that should be noted. However, this is just an illustration, and it's worth noting that the endoplasmic reticulum could be less "branched," perhaps more extensive throughout the cell, with narrower sacs and tubules.

Finally, regarding external appearance: The cell is awl-shaped, with a "neck" approximately 6 µm long, which "extends along a substantial portion of the single flagellum and reappears when the flagellum moves to a new location." This leads me to believe that the neck acts as a "cover" for part of the flagellum, but I'm not certain. In the illustration, I've depicted the single flagellum emerging from the tip of the neck, but it assumes that it continues within the neck and is eventually connected to a basal body that appears to be located not at the tip of the neck, but rather near its base on the main cell body (see Katz et al. 2011, Figure 2D). The flagellum measures 6 to 12 µm in length. The flagellum is located anteriorly and is used for movement.

I have represented the basal body with a standard 9+0 microtubular arrangement (9 peripheral triplets and no central microtubules). This contrasts with the 9+2 arrangement of the flagellum, which has 9 peripheral doublets and two central microtubules; this arrangement is not shown. Technically, the illustration represents S. tetraspora in a "longitudinal" view (although it is not a cell section), and therefore the microtubules of the basal body and those of the flagellum should appear as closely packed hairs. 

However, I have chosen to represent the microtubular arrangement of the basal body in a cross-section to highlight the 9+0 arrangement. This assumes that the transition from 9+0 (basal body) to flagellum (9+2) does not occur literally at the tip of the neck, but at some intermediate point, I believe slightly closer to the cell body. Honestly, I'm not sure; the article doesn't mention anything about it either, which is why I haven't shown that connection.

Besides the flagellum, in the gliding form, which is the one I've shown, there are a series of small pseudopodia (cytoplasmic extensions) in the neck area, and another large pseudopodia at the rear. It seems that these pseudopodia don't exist in the swimming form; in the amoeboid form, they do exist, but they're distributed throughout the cell, very long, and the flagellum "disappears"—or rather, it seems to be reabsorbed. In the forms with the flagellum present, swimming or gliding, the neck also appears.

Man I'm tired

Anyway, I think that's all I had to say about this organism. The organism is most likely transparent and should appear grayish. You know what that means: the colors I've used in these illustrations serve more of an educational purpose and don't actually represent reality. That said, I hope you liked this information and found it useful. 

Goodbye.

Porphyridium purpureum (Bory) K.M.Drew & R.Ross 1965

Well, it's an honor to begin the third set of illustrations with the 21st organism to be illustrated, and that honor goes to this single-celled red alga. Given how well-known it is and all the research surrounding it, I'm surprised it hasn't yet had an image representing it in its article. So, I saw the opportunity and took it.

Reminder that it is free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0, non-commercial, attribution required (DOTkamina 2026).

◝(๑꒪່౪̮꒪່๑)◜

Well, this is a single-celled red alga from the family Porphyridiaceae, order Porphyridiales, class Porphyridiophyceae, subphylum Proteorhodophytina. Within this subphylum, it shares characteristics with other groups of red algae, both filamentous and pseudofilamentous, which definitely appear larger due to their more multicellular organization. 

Finally, it belongs to the phylum Rhodophyta, which includes all red algae, and these are further classified within the infrakingdom Rhodaria (red algae and their relatives, which are basically Rhodophyta along with Picozoa and Rhodelphidia—guess what?—the first protists I illustrated!), subkingdom Biliphyta (which would encompass Rhodaria and Glaucophyta). 

Anyway, this subkingdom Biliphyta is considered obsolete according to Wikipedia, but AlgaeBase still uses it. The important point is that Rhodaria, along with Glaucophyta and Viridiplantae (plants and relatives of plant ancestors), these three clades, make up the large clade Archaeplastida. Archaeplastida, together with Pancryptista (class Endohelea and phylum Cryptista, which includes the cryptomonad algae I have illustrated several times previously), make up the large CAM clade.

The sources I used and read for the creation of the image, as well as the text where I explain it, are these:

• "A genetic and ultrastructural study of three clones of Porphyridium purpureum (Bory de Saint-Vincent, 1797) Drew et Ross, 1965 (Rhodophyta) from the marine microalgae collection of the Zhirmunsky institute of marine biology". K. V. Efimova, M. A. Kreshchenovskaya, N. A. Aizdaicher, T. Yu. Orlova. Russian Journal of Marine Biology. Vol. 40, No. 5, 364–374 pp. 2014.
• "Advances in the production of bioactive substances from marine unicellular microalgae Porphyridium spp.". Shaohua Li, Liang Ji, Qianwen Shi, Haizhen Wu, Jianhua Fan. Bioresource Technology. Volume 292. 2019.
• "Biological and technical aspects on valorization of red microalgae genera Porphyridium". Asep Bayu, Diah Radini Noerdjito, Siti Irma Rahmawati, Masteria Yunovilsa Putra & Surachai Karnjanakom. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery. Volume 13, pages 12395–12411. 2023.
• "Enhanced growth and metabolite production from a novel strain of Porphyridium sp". Latifa Tounsi, Hajer Ben Hlima, Hana Derbel, David Duchez, Christine Gardarin, Pascal Dubessay, Marwa Drira, Imen Fendri, Philippe Michaud, Slim Abdelkafi. Bioengineered. Volume 15, Issue 1. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2023.2294160. 2023.
• "Granules associated with the chloroplast lamellae of Porphyridium cruentum". E. Gantt, S. Conti. Journal of Cell Biology. DOI:10.1083/JCB.29.3.423. 1966.
• "Porphyridium purpureum (Bory) Drew et Ross (Porphyridiales, Rhodophyceae)—first record of a marine unicellular red alga in New Zealand". W. A. Nelson & K. G. Ryan. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. 1988.
• "Porphyridium purpureum microalga physiological and ultrastructural changes under copper intoxication". Zhanna V. Markina, Tatyana Yu. Orlova, Yuri A. Vasyanovich, Alexander I. Vardavas, Polychronis D. Stivaktakis, Constantine I. Vardavas, Manolis N. Kokkinakis, Ramin Rezaee, Eren Ozcagli, Kirill S. Golokhvast. Toxicology Reports, volume 8, 988-993 pp. 2021.
• "The Ultrastructure of Porphyridium cruentum". E Gantt, S F Conti. J Cell Biol. Volume 26, Issue 2. 365–381 pp. doi: 10.1083/jcb.26.2.365. 1965.
• "Unusual mitosis in the red alga Porphyridium purpureum". R. Bronchart and V. Demoulin. Nature 268, 80-81 pp. 1977.

Seen this way, it seems like an impressive bibliography, but most of it was mainly to learn for the first time about the anatomy of the organism, as well as aspects of its life, or other general topics. Anyway, here's the illustration:

Well, what can I say about this organism? The most striking feature is its stellate chloroplast, meaning it has a shape close to a star, although to me it looks more like an egg smashed on the floor. In the illustration, I've depicted the chloroplast with a series of curves inside, and these curves represent the thylakoids. In the center of the chloroplast is a pyrenoid of a darker tone. I don't know if the pyrenoid is actually darker than the chloroplast; in the micrographs I've seen, I haven't observed much difference in tone. What I do know is that the pyrenoid has some internal "curves" (which I've drawn) that aren't as compact as the curves (thylakoids) of the chloroplast. I have no idea what those thylakoid curves are (see images in Efimova et al. 2014; Gantt and Conti 1965; Gantt and Conti 1966; Markina et al. 2021; Nelson and Ryan 1988).

Other important organelles: the nucleus, of course, which has a nucleolus... or at least that's what I infer from what I see in the micrographs by Markina et al. 2021. Of course, in that article, the micrographs correspond to P. purpureum stressed by the presence of copper. But in another micrograph of Porphyridium cruentum, a distinctive area of ​​the nucleus is evident, which I assume is the nucleolus (see Gantt and Conti 1966). So I've depicted the nucleus with a nucleolus.

The other organelles tend to be located at the cell's periphery, not in the center (Efimova et al. 2014). Both starch grains and lipid bodies are present, and the latter are darker (according to Efimova et al. 2014). Starch grains are also included as peripheral structures, but I've depicted them more dispersed, in homage to the micrograph by Gantt and Conti (1966). It's important to understand that in my illustration, these starch grains are "in the periphery above the cell's center," not literally in the center.

The Golgi apparatus is also located at the periphery, according to Efimova et al. (2014), and I've depicted it as such, made of dictyosomes (the sacs) with attached vesicles. I've also depicted the mitochondria. According to Efimova et al. 2014, there are several tubular mitochondria. This feels strange to me because in most of my previous illustrations, I was getting used to the "single reticulated mitochondrion" scheme. It's a bit of a shock that this isn't the case in P. purpureum. These mitochondria are also distributed in the periphery. I've depicted the mitochondrial cristae as if they were tubular, but for that, I based my work on P. cruentum (see Gantt and Conti 1965). 

For the endoplasmic reticulum (or as Gantt and Conti 1965 call it, "endoplasmic reticulum"), I also relied on their description of P. cruentum: "neither extensive nor elaborate." That's why you'll see that I've depicted it peripherally (which actually means it's in contact with the cell surface and also with the nucleus, of course), and very simply, with relatively short "branches." I assume they must be similar across species.

Finally, the cell is enveloped in an "extracellular polysaccharide sheath," which is, indeed, just that: a thick mucilage covering made of pectins. In actual micrographs, you can identify this structure as a kind of transparent "aura" or "areola" visible around the cell.

RN it's so midnight, 3AM and I'm still in front of da computer lol. Playing Roblox before btw.

I think there's nothing more to say about this organism. I hope my computer doesn't crash so I can upload the images, because it's already night ೭੧(❛〜❛✿)੭೨

Today was the day!

Holy moly dudes.

Holy moly.

It seems that, in terms of the final project, my predictions from yesterday didn't come true. In fact, I think I did well, because it seems I did manage to get those permits. That made my day so much that I had time to do some more drawing.

That's all I had to say. Don't think it's a lot? Well, suit yourself. I don't care. Tomorrow's for bed :6

𝒫𝓇𝑜𝒷𝒶𝒷𝒾𝓁𝒾𝓉𝓎, 𝓊𝓃𝒸𝑒𝓇𝓉𝒶𝒾𝓃𝓉𝓎, 𝒶𝓃𝒹 𝒶𝓃𝒶𝓈𝓉𝑜𝓂𝑜𝓈𝑒𝒹 𝒻𝑒𝑒𝓁𝒾𝓃𝑔𝓈

Well, well, well, huh? Episode 6 of Class de 2-banme ni Kawaii Onnanoko to Tomodachi ni Natta has left me intrigued about how the plot will develop now that the protagonist Maki's father has appeared. Daddy issues, daddy issues!

(๑ ￫ܫ￩)

                          (๑ ￫ܫ￩)

                                                          (๑ ￫ܫ￩)

                                                                                         (๑ ￫ܫ￩) 

                                                                                                                             (๑ ￫ܫ￩)

                                                                                                                                                         (๑ ￫ܫ￩)

It's been a while, hasn't it?

ヾ( ^^ゞ)

Hi, lol.

I've always been bad at greeting people and starting conversations, even if I'm talking to air. The reason for this post is to say that everything is... "okay," you could say. I don't know if I should describe myself as being in a state of redemption, passivity, or surrender. I say this because I know that very important things (with negative processes and consequences) are happening in the background. 

I suppose it's a combination of everything. But I must also say that other things have improved. Well, at least, I can say that my relationship with my mother is improving. I've learned to listen to her and basically not just see the negative side of her interactions or the way she tries to influence me. She's a human being, and at this point, it doesn't matter how she did things or what she should have done. She's sick, and it's not the time to keep complaining. The least I can do is lessen her suffering because I'm worried it will get worse in the future.

This has also meant less friction with her at home. I don't know if it's because I've been taking care of her since her surgery, so I've somehow taken on a more "useful" role at home, or if it's simply because I've tried not to comment on or question any of her decisions or "micro-injustices" towards me, and just let it go to avoid stress. Keeping the cortisol down, as the meme goes.

My computer has continued to malfunction. I don't think I've mentioned this, or maybe I have in another post, but if not, I'll give you some context: they detected physical damage to the graphics card due to overheating. And well, apparently, that's been a real pain to fix. Not to mention impossible, since it's a part that can't be replaced in laptops, and I'd have to get another one.

Logically, with my own health issues, my parents' health problems, and other problems related to finding a way to make ends meet (business), and the fact that I've been terrible with the final project and I'm not even the genius who just needs a shot in the arm... well, I've come to the conclusion that it's not worth it (well, I don't deserve it) to buy a new computer. As it is, I'll just keep going downhill.

That brings me to the final project. 

Progress? Minimal. 

But at least I managed to finish the measurements I had pending and use some R Studio to create an interesting graph that isn't just text. That's made me feel like I haven't completely abandoned the final project. My problem with it now is that I sent a letter regarding project execution permissions (sampling ethics, that sort of thing), and the maximum response time was supposed to be two weeks. It's been 18 days and all I've received is spam from strangers inviting me to dubious influencer courses.

................................ So tomorrow, I'm going to the registrar's office at my university, feeling incredibly anxious, to ask what's going on. But my final project topic isn't well-received at the university, I think, because of its small sample size, its descriptive nature, and the fact that I'm basically not contributing anything worthwhile. Honestly, I chose this topic because it didn't require long (and expensive) trips or lengthy permits, but unfortunately, the "stopping factor" is precisely that it's not seen as a groundbreaking topic "that will change the country's perspective."

I don't know, I'm going with the fear, and perhaps also the expectation, that they'll tell me anything and everything regarding those permits. From "Oh, we didn't receive it, maybe you sent it in the wrong format" to "Yes, we received it, but the topic is so bland and trivial that we decided to ignore it. Send all the letters... and maybe we'll help you." Which would be the end of it, because then my topic has no future. And it's too late to look for another topic. If I do, I'd have to bet on graduating at least in 2028. Hell no!

(●´□`)

I don't know, honestly.

I don't see much of a future for myself. I'm dealing with that, and also with finishing some books I've tried to write (more like compilations of information; I've concluded I'm terrible at writing original things). I've seen that they're long projects, so I don't know if any of those books will ever see the light of day.

Because of all this, I've also put my illustrations on hold for a bit. I have part of the draft for illustration 21; I had it all ready at the beginning of the month. But I guess I got mentally exhausted—I mean, I had a mini-collapse and managed to escape it—because illustration 21 is complex, and I don't quite remember how I managed the information to make that drawing. But the Protista Project is currently the most solid thing I've done as DOTkamina, so I'm working on getting motivated to continue it and not let it become just another dead project.

Sometimes I do wish my life were simpler. Financial stability, so I could have a style of worry more like the characters in a rom-com where the biggest concern is whether that girl likes you or not. Well, I do have that worry... a deeper, more painful one. But with all the context I've mentioned, it's buried under more urgent priorities. All this while I'm out on the street looking for rare medicines, while I see people my age with partners or friends, enjoying life to the fullest. And then I feel like I've aged too much and that maybe my best time (of carefree days and untouched dreams) is already over.

...

....

......

.........

...........

If it happens that I become just another lifeless NPC in society, at least I'd like to make some more progress on my illustrations (which, as I said, are the most solid thing I've built). The more I have done, the less I'll feel like "I should have done more while I could, instead of overthinking."

I guess that's all I wanted to say. 

Wish me luck tomorrow in my search for answers at the Secretary's office. 

If the situation becomes truly impossible or unfavorable, perhaps I'll write another post addressing the emptiness of the digital world. 

....... Which, ironically, is my second home.

Cryptomonas paramaecium (Ehrenberg) Hoef-Emden & Melkonian 2003 = Chilomonas paramaecium Ehrenberg 1831

This organism is a hoax. It has supposedly already been reclassified as another species of Cryptomonas campylomorph form (no cryptomorph has been found), but in any case, AlgaeBase still considers it the type (lectotype) of the genus Chilomonas, since it was previously considered part of that genus, different from Cryptomonas. There is another name used, which is "Chilomonas paramecium", instead of "paramaecium". It appears as such in Clay (2015).

This species belongs to the family Cryptomonadaceae, order Cryptomonadales, class Cryptophyceae (commonly called "cryptomonad algae"). You know where this is going: cryptomonad algae are then included in the subphylum Rollomonadia, phylum Cryptista, subkingdom Hacrobia, kingdom Chromista. 

The kingdom Chromista is related to the clade Archaeplastida, which includes algae that are relatives and ancestors of plants. You might also encounter another classification, where the phylum Cryptista is included in the clade Pancryptista, which is related to Archaplastida, and both form the large CAM clade. But that's not really important; the point is that Cryptomonas paramaecium is another distant relative of plant ancestors.

Reminder that it is free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0, non-commercial, attribution required (DOTkamina 2026). The sources I used and read for the creation of the image, as well as the text where I explain, are these:

• "Chapter 18 - Cryptomonads". Brec L. Clay, 2015. Freshwater Algae of North America (Second Edition). Academic Press.
• "Cryptomonas paramaecium (Ehrenberg, 1832) Hoef-Emden & Melkonian, 2003". Martin Kreutz. Real Micro Life 2021.
• "Revision of the Genus Cryptomonas (Cryptophyceae): a Combination of Molecular Phylogeny and Morphology Provides Insights into a Long-Hidden Dimorphism". Kerstin Hoef-Emden and Michael Melkonian. Protist, Volume 154, Issues 3-4, 371-409 pp. 2003.

As I mentioned, C. paramaecium has a campylomorph form. This means a simple furrow without stomata and an almost sigmoid cell shape, although in this species, the shape is usually more ovate-elongated and slightly wider anteriorly. The vestibulum has a vestibular ligule (this ligule is absent in the cryptomorph form in another species). The furrow is quite small compared to others.

Most notably, it lacks chloroplasts and pyrenoids, instead possessing leucoplasts with starch grains and nucleomorphs (one in each chloroplast). Therefore, it doesn't have a red or green pigment to give it color; it is transparent (though under a microscope it appears grayish or glassy). In this image, I've used various grayish to bluish tones and other minor colors, but it's important to remember that the objective is more didactic than realistic.

Dimensions: 14–28 µm long × 10–13 µm wide × 8–10 µm thick. However, Clay (2015) attributes larger sizes to it, 20–40 µm long and 10–20 µm in diameter.

Other observed features include the contractile vacuole at the anterior extreme of the cell, two Maupas bodies located approximately in the cell's central region, and the gullet surrounded by ejectisomes (few are illustrated in Clay (2015), but more are seen in the micrographs by Kreutz (2021).

According to Kreutz (2021), flagella are slightly shorter than the cell and the same length, but in the illustrations from both that source and Clay (2015), they are depicted as shorter relative to the cell, and I have represented them accordingly, choosing to make them approximately half the size of the cell. Although both are equal in length (again, in the illustrations in Kreutz (2021) and Clay (2015), they are not depicted at the same lengths), I have chosen to represent the longer flagellum slightly longer than the shorter (ventral) one.

I have drawn the endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi apparatus, and the single reticulated mitochondrion. The shapes of these structures are speculative. In the case of the mitochondrion, it's a predicted reticulated shape based on what Santore and Greenwood (1977) explains, where it's mentioned that Cryptomonas has a single mitochondrion with numerous branches distributed throughout the cell, concentrated in areas like the gullet. It's assumed that these mitochondrial branches should have different thicknesses in various sections, but in my drawing, the width of these branches is almost uniform.

According to Kugrens et al. (1987): unlike other species, the flagella do not follow the basic type 1 flagellar arrangement (long dorsal flagellum with two rows of mastigonemes, each with a terminal filament; short ventral flagellum with one row of mastigonemes, each with two unequal terminal filaments). Instead, there is a type 4 flagellar arrangement. In this arrangement, there is only one row of mastigonemes for both flagella. The nature of the terminal filaments is the same as in type 1 flagella. Therefore: long (dorsal) flagellum with one row of mastigonemes, each with a terminal filament; short (ventral) flagellum with one row of mastigonemes, each with two unequal terminal filaments. Additionally, at the terminal tip of the long flagellum, there are four "terminal hairs".

Both the mastigonemes and the additional filaments and hairs can only be seen with an electron microscope. Don't expect to see them with a light microscope. Even the flagella are sometimes difficult to see with a light microscope. I almost forgot: both flagella are located on the right side of the vestibule. That's from a dorsal view. In a ventral view, they appear to be on the left, but that's just an illusion!

I have nothing more to say in this post about this organism. In theory, this was supposed to be the entry about Giardia duodenalis, but I had some anatomical questions about its microtubules and I'm investigating it to see if I need to make any further corrections. 

Anyway, that's how, with this organism, I've reached illustration number 20 out of the 100 I have to complete. But hey. It's more fun to say I'm 80 short than 96.

Guys, episode 5 of Class de 2-banme ni Kawaii Onnanoko to Tomodachi ni Natta was SO DAMN PEAK

And I'm not lying, I genuinely smiled watching the whole afternoon-evening scene in this episode. For me, it's a reflection of many of my inner feelings and dreams. I absolutely loved it. I'd love to spoil the manga for myself, but I'd rather wait for the next episode. It's been a long time since I've been this excited about an anime like this. And it feels amazing to watch it while listening to "Purple Rain" by Prince in the background. That whole moment is truly beautiful, I swear.

One of the sensations I'll cherish.

I think it's motivation enough to encourage me to even begin to draft the text of the next organism I'm describing.

Hatena arenicola N.Okamoto & Inouye 2006

I'm happy to report that despite everything, I was finally able to find the time to finish this illustration and break out of my 20-illustration slump. I actually have another one ready from last year, but I want to save that one for later; in fact, I hope to explain it in a future post. And I apologize for any discomfort or strangeness you may have felt.

In this post, I present the illustrations I've created of Hatena arenicola N.Okamoto & Inouye 2006. The illustrations are free to use under CC BY-SA 4.0, non-commercial, attribution required (DOTkamina 2026).

It belongs to the family Katablepharidaceae, order Katablepharidales, class Katablepharidophyceae, which is part of the subphylum Rollomonadia. This means that Hatena arenicola is related to cryptomonad algae (class Cryptophyceae) and goniomonads (class Goniomonadophyceae), which are also within Rollomonadia. Aside from that, it's the same story I've explained in other posts: Rollomonadia belongs to the phylum Cryptista, clade Pancryptista, and CAM clade. The latter includes Archaeplastida as the sister group to Pancryptista, and encompasses the plants and algae related to its ancestors. Therefore, Hatena arenicola is a distant relative of plants. It's also worth mentioning that another way to classify it is to include the phylum Cryptista as part of the subkingdom Hacrobia, kingdom Chromista, and superkingdom Corticata, where the other kingdom is Plantae. But anyway, the conclusions regarding relationships are almost the same.

I consulted a single source for the morphological and descriptive information of Hatena arenicola, as well as the primary source for the illustrations: "Hatena arenicola gen. et sp. nov., a Katablepharid Undergoing Probable Plastid Acquisition" by Noriko Okamoto and Isao Inouye (2006).

What's curious about this organism is that it seems to have been left "halfway" in the process of acquiring chloroplasts. To give you some context, it's believed that modern plants evolved from eukaryotes that acquired photosynthetic bacteria (primary endosymbiosis, including the ancestors of Viridiplantae, Glaucophyta, and Rhodophyta) or algae (that is, eukaryotes that already had a photosynthetic bacterium integrated as a chloroplast). This latter case is known as secondary endosymbiosis, and includes Euglenophyta and Chlorarachniophyta (which acquired green algae), as well as Heterokontophyta, Haptophyta, Cryptophyta, Dinophyta, and Apicomplexa (which acquired red algae).

There is some evidence of organisms that have undergone secondary endosymbiosis, but very little about how this process occurred. And that's what makes Hatena arenicola stand out, as it appears to be an organism that hasn't yet fully integrated an alga as an organelle. Instead, it's "halfway" integrated; it has a life cycle where it can live freely, and it captures a free-living alga (of the genus Nephroselmis), which it doesn't digest (as it would with other algae), but rather integrates as another part of its body, in a state of endosymbiosis.

That's why it's best to present the following image as the front page:

The illustration essentially depicts how an individual of Hatena arenicola, lacking a symbiotic alga, possesses a feeding apparatus (predatory phase). It uses this apparatus to ingest the symbiotic alga, which then integrates with it, giving rise to the symbiotic state of Hatena arenicola. Due to the process of acquiring the symbiont, the feeding apparatus disappears. When it needs to divide, the nucleus (originally located posteriorly) shifts to the anterior region. The organism divides, with one daughter cell retaining the symbiont and the other not. This daughter cell without a symbiont will develop a feeding apparatus and continue its predatory phase until it acquires another symbiotic alga, Nephroselmis. The daughter cell that inherited the symbiont can continue its life in the "plant phase," living off the photosynthesis provided by the symbiont, and can divide again, generating one daughter cell with a symbiont and another without. As an additional note, I consulted "Phylogeny and ultrastructure of Nephroselmis and Pseudoscourfieldia (Chlorophyta), including the description of Nephroselmis anterostigmatica sp. nov. and a proposal for the Nephroselmidales ord. nov." by Nakayama et al. (2007) for information on the ventral and dorsal locations of the Nephroselmis symbiont.

That said, it is clear that Hatena arenicola has at least two main states: with a symbiont and without a symbiont. Let's begin with the state with the symbiont stage. Hatena arenicola does not possess a feeding apparatus in this stage. Aside from that, it does have everything else: a furrow from which the flagella emerge (the exact area where they emerge is known as the "flagellar insertion zone"). The flagella are derived from basal bodies, which I haven't shown here. There are two types of ejectisomes: type I (large, arranged in two rows near the flagellar insertion zone), and type II (smaller, distributed in numerous rows throughout the cell, except in the area surrounding the symbiont's eyespot).

In addition to the ejectisomes, it also has a nucleus located in the middle posterior region of the cell (when the cell is not ready to divide), with electron-dense chromatin that is always condensed (i.e., in a heterochromatic state). I've represented this heterochromatin as darker clumps in the nucleus; I think it's more visible in the version without the symbiont, which I'll discuss later. In addition to the nucleus, there is also a single "Golgi body" between the nucleus and the flagellar apparatus (basal bodies + flagella). In Figure 6D, you can see some "lines" within the Golgi body, and that's how I've chosen to represent it as well. Next to the Golgi body, 

I've depicted a lysosome, which is evidence of the predatory lifestyle of Hatena arenicola. It's assumed that this organism lives by preying on other algae until it finds a Nephroselmis symbiont. With other algae, it simply digests them completely, and their scales may remain within the lysosomes. I don't know how many lysosomes there are, but I've only depicted one, containing Pyramimonas scales. In the context of these illustrations, and especially for this one of the symbiotic state, it's assumed that in this specific case, Pyramimonas scales still remain in the lysosome, even after acquiring the Nephroselmis symbiont. Incidentally, when it engulfs Nephroselmis, the latter also undergoes a reduction in its structures, which are digested, leaving remnants such as the (more or less) star-shaped scales of Nephroselmis, which also remain inside the lysosome.

There are many mitochondrial profiles throughout the cell, and the authors think they could be sections or pieces of a single large reticulated mitochondrion, so I've represented it that way. The endoplasmic reticulum is distributed loosely throughout the cell. The article refers to "rough endoplasmic reticulum" that "extends beneath the cell surface," which implies the existence of a smooth endoplasmic reticulum. In other illustrations, I've represented both arrangements of endoplasmic reticulum, but frankly, in this illustration, I was just too lazy (besides, the image was going to become even more oversaturated), so I've left it simply as "endoplasmic reticulum."

And now, the symbiont. Earlier I mentioned that Hatena arenicola literally engulfs the symbiont Nephroselmis. How do the authors know that it actually becomes a symbiont and isn't merely a hijacking of structures and eventual death of the ingested organism? Well, because the symbiont Nephroselmis literally grows inside Hatena arenicola. It's true that it loses several structures, such as flagella, endoplasmic reticulum, and the scales on its cell surface, but in return, it undergoes modifications in its eyespot, its chloroplast grows to almost occupy most of the space in the Hatena arenicola cell, and it develops more pyrenoids, because originally the symbiont only has one. 

This is a response to a symbiotic adaptation in which it must obtain energy from the sun through photosynthesis, but no longer solely for itself, but also for the host (Hatena arenicola). Hence, it develops more chloroplasts, eyespots, and pyrenoids: to generate more energy for both organisms. In exchange, Hatena arenicola loses its feeding apparatus, as it now obtains the energy it needs to live from the photosynthesis of its symbiont. What does the symbiont gain from this? Well, I suppose it gains protection from Hatena arenicola, since it is "covered" by the host.

I should mention that the symbiont's cytoplasm is preserved, although it is called "vestigial cytoplasm." It's not very noticeable in the illustration, but I've drawn it there. Even under a microscope, it's not very visible because most of the symbiont's cytoplasmic space is occupied by the chloroplast itself, which in the article is simply called a "plastid." The life cycle diagram only shows the chloroplast, but keep in mind that in reality, it's not just the chloroplast that exists; it's actually located within the vestigial cytoplasm.

The symbiont's pyrenoids have some invaginations of the chloroplast's thylakoids. I've represented these invaginations as slight convex curves. I haven't shown the thylakoids themselves. The pyrenoids are surrounded by starch sheath, as is common for those who have read the protist posts to date. The symbiont also retains the reticulated mitochondrion, with flat, often degraded cristae (which is why I've represented the cristae as small elliptical spots distributed along the symbiont's mitochondria). The symbiont's nucleus is also preserved, located face-to-face with the nucleus of Hatena arenicola. There are also sacs that resemble those of a Golgi apparatus, but it is thought to be in an inactive or degraded form since it has no associated vesicles. The eyespot, of course, located where the feeding apparatus would be, is conspicuous and made of a single-layered sheet of osmiophilic granules. The eyespot is located beneath the chloroplast membrane.

In the illustration of the symbiont state, I have depicted the symbiont's chloroplast in its most massive form, occupying almost the entire cell space. In the illustration of the non-symbiont stage, the Hatena arenicola structures that do not belong to the symbiont are more clearly visible. Additionally, the feeding apparatus is present, which is actually a microtubular network made of two parts: transverse tubular rings (shown here in pink), and longitudinal microtubules arrayed in a single layer (shown here in yellow). 

Obviously, these are not the actual colors; I represented them this way to make them stand out against the blue background. Within the microtubular skeleton of the feeding apparatus, there are several electron-opaque granules, some large and elongated (light gray), and others smaller, granular, and pigmented (i.e., darker). I've represented both types, but I don't think I've managed to distinguish between them well, and they become barely visible with the colors I used for the feeding apparatus. Oh well, I never passed color theory.

As always, remember that the colors used in these illustrations are more for educational purposes than to accurately represent reality. My ribs are hurting, so I'll stop writing here.