DNA Barcoding and geographical scale effect: The problems of undersampling genetic diversity hotspots

Abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Italian odonates in the Pandora's box: A comprehensive DNA barcoding inventory shows taxonomic warnings at the Holarctic scale

“…Further sampling campaigns, in Italy and throughout the whole range of the warning species groups (as recommended by Gaytán et al, 2020), the integration of multiple genetic markers (e.g. the universal single‐copy orthologs USCOs recently described by Eberle et al., 2020) and accurate morphometrics analyses will be necessary to correctly address each possible case of taxonomic (and conservation) interest.…”

“…Another possible weakness of DNA barcoding regards the geographic distribution of the samples. Some studies observed a diminished identification accuracy due to the increasing intraspecific genetic divergence when a wider geographic sampling scale was considered (Bergsten et al., 2012; Meyer & Paulay, 2005) or when genetic diversity hotspots are ignored or undersampled (Gaytán et al, 2020). The availability of reliable reference databases covering taxonomic diversity and including the whole intraspecific geographic variability of the considered taxa constitutes a keystone element for large biodiversity investigations associated with DNA and environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding (Creedy et al., 2020; Piper et al., 2019; Porter & Hajibabaei, 2018).…”

“…Although the Odonata, together with Trichoptera, Hemiptera and crustaceans are the best‐covered taxa in the BOLD System database (Weigand et al., 2019), the currently available data do not take into account possible biases due to the absence of representatives from areas of biogeographical/speciation interest (Gaytán et al, 2020) and to the absence of genetic information (including DNA barcoding data) for some species of conservation concern (Boudot & Kalkman, 2015; Kalkman et al., 2018; Sahlén et al., 2010). Europe can be considered the cradle of odonate systematics, but the evolutionary history and radiation of many genera, especially in Mediterranean glacial refugia, are still unresolved (e.g.…”

Factors affecting the efficiency of molecular species delimitation in a species‐rich insect family

“…In the context of the rapid impoverishment of global biodiversity (Hallmann et al, 2017;Sánchez-Bayo & Wyckhuys, 2019;Van Klink et al, 2020), it is easy to understand the reason of the success of molecular taxonomy that, exploiting molecular information, has the potential to accelerate the identification of organisms and the discovery process of new taxa (Hebert & Gregory, 2005;Swartz, Mwale, & Hanner, 2008;Monaghan et al, 2009;Mutanen, Kaila, & Tabell, 2013;Gaytán et al, 2020). The DNA-based identification methods represented by DNA taxonomy, applicable also in DNA metabarcoding (Taberlet, Coissac, Pompanon, Brochmann, & Willerslev, 2012), stand out as widely used approaches for biodiversity surveys (e.g., Telfer et al, 2015;Pavan-Kumar, Gireesh-Babu, & Lakra, 2015;deWaard et al, 2019).…”

DNA barcodes of birds from northern Colombia

“…Despite efforts to encourage sequence data collection and sharing through local and global initiatives (e.g. Barcode Life Data System, BOLD), most taxa are under-represented for barcodes ( de Kerdrel et al 2020 , Gaytán et al 2020 , Ko et al 2013 ). Naturally, although barcodes are particularly useful for advancing on the recognition of unknown diversity (in groups where alpha taxonomy is still developing or for highly diverse groups where many species remain to be described), it is also extremely useful for species identification in groups with better resolution in their taxonomy ( Collins and Cruickshank 2012 , Hebert and Gregory 2005 , Hebert et al 2003 ).…”