Background.

Dinoflagellates (Dinoflagellata) are recognized by the morphological characteristics of their specific cell cover called amphiesma. This complex has presented advantages for the description of many species, however, there are many others whose basic morphological information is scarce, or for which no consensus has been reached regarding nomenclatural issues. An example of this problem is the case of Durinskia balticaCarty & Cox 1986, a name associated with a dinoflagellate that has had circumscription and systematic position problems because it has undergone multiple name changes associated with its morphology, passing through four different genera (Glenodinium, Peridinium, Peridiniopsis and Durinskia) since its first description.

Goals.

The objective of this work was to make a historical review of the characters that have been used in the description of species of Durinskia to identify the taxonomic discrepancies that the genus has experienced.

Methods.

Bibliographical information on Durinskia and its records worldwide were compiled. The criteria used to separate the species were compared.

Results.

In two comparative tables on the taxonomic history of D. baltica and related species, the morphological and environmental characters used, and the key points in the criteria to circumscribe this species are presented and critically reviewed.

Conclusions.

With the current state of knowledge, it is not possible to resolve whether D. baltica is an exclusively freshwater species or if it also inhabit marine environments.