2011
DOI: 10.1899/10-010.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accelerated construction of a regional DNA-barcode reference library: caddisflies (Trichoptera) in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park

Abstract: BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
43
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
43
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, both our sequences and the BOLD barcodes contributed equally to evidence some paraphyly in a few genera and especially, in the family Baetidae. All these data certainly contribute to support the efficacy of the COI barcodes in the study area to (1) discriminate taxa, (2) recognize major taxonomic schemes in Ephemeroptera, as in prior studies (Ball et al, 2005;Zhou et al, 2011;Webb et al, 2012), and further highlight the importance of the intra-/ interspecific sampling extent to achieve statistically sound and reliable results.…”
Section: Potential Of Coi-based Dna Barcoding For Mayfly Species Discsupporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Interestingly, both our sequences and the BOLD barcodes contributed equally to evidence some paraphyly in a few genera and especially, in the family Baetidae. All these data certainly contribute to support the efficacy of the COI barcodes in the study area to (1) discriminate taxa, (2) recognize major taxonomic schemes in Ephemeroptera, as in prior studies (Ball et al, 2005;Zhou et al, 2011;Webb et al, 2012), and further highlight the importance of the intra-/ interspecific sampling extent to achieve statistically sound and reliable results.…”
Section: Potential Of Coi-based Dna Barcoding For Mayfly Species Discsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…These discrepancies were most probably due to taxonomic undersampling, to the inappropriate use of the Neighbor Joining as an analytical tool, and to the model of sequence evolution (K2P) used. Both the NJ and the K2P methods are considered "standard" in DNA barcoding (Hebert et al, 2003;Zhou et al, 2011) but probably non-optimal (Collins and Cruickshank, 2013;White et al, 2014). For instance, a parallel RaxML analysis run with the GTRCAT model on our dataset showed a highly supported topology, more congruent with mayfly major taxonomic ranks (Online Resource III).…”
Section: Potential Of Coi-based Dna Barcoding For Mayfly Species Discmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Minimum interspecific distances ranged from 0.3–24.7% (mean: 12.5%). One hundred five species (29.7%) had maximum intraspecific divergences greater than 2.2%, a level of divergence found to delimit species across diverse groups of insects [1], [2], [20] although higher maximum intraspecific distances have been observed in Trichoptera when widely separated geographic areas are included [3]. Almost 20% of species with more than one specimen had maximum intraspecific divergences >5.0%; these species with high intraspecific divergences may represent species-complexes and when they are excluded from the analysis, the mean maximum intraspecific divergence decreased to 1.3%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…This species has been reported from Quebec and New Brunswick south to Oklahoma, Tennessee, and North Carolina (Table 2), including the following states and provinces: CANADA: New Brunswick (Harris & Lawrence 1978); Quebec (Roy & Harper 1975Wiggins 1977Wiggins , 1996Williams & Williams 1987). USA: Maine (Bilger 1986); North Carolina (Ross 1938;Wray 1950;Wiggins 1977Wiggins , 1996Huryn & Wallace 1988;Lenat et al 2010;Zhou et al, 2011; and from NC/SC Unzicker et al 1982); New York ; New Hampshire (Ross 1944;); Oklahoma Bowles & Mathis 1992); Pennsylvania ; Tennessee (Ross 1944;Wiggins 1977Wiggins , 1996Etnier et al 1998;DeWalt & Heinold 2005); Vermont (Wimmer 1979); Virginia (Parker & Voshell 1981;Flint et al 2004); and West Virginia (Tarter 1990;Griffith & Perry 1992).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%