the photographs which you have given are all out of focus. could not see any characters like Chloroplast shape, cell wall, flagella present or absent, if present how many. so kindly take some good focused photographs. and I doubt this strain may be belongs to species of Pyramimonas Schmarda, 1849.
In my opinion your material labeled as B is a Chlorophyta, Prasinophyceae, as Elaya comments, it could be Tetraselmis. I include a transcription of the description of Tetraselmis given by Lee (2008), as you can see the differential features are basically ultrastructural. “Tetraselmis is commonly found in marine waters. The cells are oval-shaped and surrounded by a theca that is formed by the coalescence of many small stellate scales that are produced in the Golgi apparatus. Four flagella are inserted in an apical pit in the cell. The flagella are covered with hairs and scales, and the flagella emerge from an opening in the theca. There is a cup-shaped chloroplast with a basal pyrenoid. A nucleus occurs in the center of the cell, and Golgi bodies are found anterior to the nucleus”.
I suggest consulting Thronsen in Tomas (1996) Identifying Marine Phytoplankton, Academic Press, New York.
Your material labeled as B5 is probably a small naviculoid or nitzschioid diatom.
Is your material labeled as Di fixed? It shows similitude with the material labelled B5.
I concur with Eugenia on B5 being a small pennate diatom, given the overall shape, color and location of chloroplasts. I'll be a little more bolder with possible identification and suggest that you start with the monoraphids like Achnanthes/Achnanthidium or things closely related - that group has gone through some major revisions recently so double check your names.
The other images (B1 and Sh) reminds me of Chlamydomonas or something similar (like Tetraselmis). If you look at enough of the cells it hints at the chloroplasts being cup shaped, but at least on some of the cells small "bulb" at the flat, anterior, end looks like the attachment area for the flagella.
The picture are not well enough for proper identification. Its better to give some high resolution pictures in 100X may be and I agree with Ines about the 3 rd and 5th pic. U can isolate them and take a SEM as the size may be small enough to look into the characters.