Hajibabaei, Mehrdad, Singer, Gregory AC and Hickey, Donal A. (2006) Benchmarking DNA barcodes: an assessment using available primate sequences. Genome, 49 (7). pp. 851-854. ISSN 0831-2796
Preview |
Text (application/pdf)
384kBHickey_Genome2006.pdf - Published Version |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/G06-025
Abstract
DNA barcoding has been recently promoted as a method for both assigning specimens to known species and for discovering new and cryptic species. Here we test both the potential and the limitations of DNA barcodes by analysing a group of well-studied organisms—the primates. Our results show that DNA barcodes provide enough information to efficiently identify and delineate primate species, but that they cannot reliably uncover many of the deeper phylogenetic relationships. Our conclusion is that these short DNA sequences do not contain enough information to build reliable molecular phylogenies or define new species, but that they can provide efficient sequence tags for assigning unknown specimens to known species. As such, DNA barcoding provides enormous potential for use in global biodiversity studies.
| Divisions: | Concordia University > Faculty of Arts and Science > Biology |
|---|---|
| Item Type: | Article |
| Refereed: | Yes |
| Authors: | Hajibabaei, Mehrdad and Singer, Gregory AC and Hickey, Donal A. |
| Journal or Publication: | Genome |
| Date: | 21 July 2006 |
| Digital Object Identifier (DOI): | 10.1139/G06-025 |
| Keywords: | DNA barcoding, species identification, primate, biodiversity |
| ID Code: | 7591 |
| Deposited By: | Danielle Dennie |
| Deposited On: | 11 May 2011 22:16 |
| Last Modified: | 18 Jan 2018 17:31 |
References:
Blaxter, M. 2003. Molecular systematics: counting angels with DNA. Nature (London), 421: 122–124.Crandall, K.A., and Buhay, J.E. 2004. Evolution. Genomic databases and the tree of life. Science (Washington, D.C.), 306: 1144–1145.
Ebach, M.C., and Holdrege, C. 2005. DNA barcoding is no substitute for taxonomy. Nature (London), 434: 697.
Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution, 39: 783–791.
Hebert, P.D.N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S.L., and deWaard, J.R. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. Biol. Sci. 270: 313–321.
Hebert, P.D.N., Stoeckle, M.Y., Zemlak, T.S., and Francis, C.M. 2004. Identification of birds through DNA barcodes. PLoS Biol. 2: E312.
Kimura, M. 1980. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16: 111–120.
Kumar, S., Tamura, K., and Nei, M. 2004. MEGA3: Integrated software for Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis and sequence alignment. Brief Bioinform. 5: 150–163.
Marshall, E. 2005. Taxonomy. Will DNA bar codes breathe life into classification? Science (Washington, D.C.), 307: 1037.
Moritz, C., and Cicero, C. 2004. DNA barcoding: promise and pitfalls. PLoS Biol. 2: e354.
Saitou, N., and Nei, M. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4: 406–425.
Schindel, D.E., and Miller, S.E. 2005. DNA barcoding a useful tool for taxonomists. Nature (London), 435: 17.
Ward, R.D., Zemlak, T.S., Innes, B.H., Last, P.R., and Hebert, P.D.N. 2005. DNA barcoding Australia’s fish species. Philos Trans R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 360: 1847–1857.
Repository Staff Only: item control page
Download Statistics
Download Statistics