The DOI matches its Crossref record.
DNA barcoding is no substitute for taxonomy
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
DNA barcoding: error rates based on comprehensive sampling
Meyer, C. P., & Paulay, G. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030422 · Cited by 1,957
DNA barcoding the floras of biodiversity hotspots
Lahaye, R., van der Bank, M., Bogarin, D., Warner, J., Pupulin, F., Gigot, G., Maurin, O., Duthoit, S., Barraclough, T. G., & Savolainen, V. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0709936105 · Cited by 911
Does the DNA barcoding gap exist? – a case study in blue butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)
Wiemers, M., & Fiedler, K. (2007) · Frontiers in Zoology · doi:10.1186/1742-9994-4-8 · Cited by 519
DNA barcoding in animal species: progress, potential and pitfalls
Waugh, J. (2007) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.20529 · Cited by 451
Taxonomy in a Changing World: Seeking Solutions for a Science in Crisis
Agnarsson, I., & Kuntner, M. (2007) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150701424546 · Cited by 316
Metadata
- Authors
- Ebach, M. C., & Holdrege, C.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2005-04-06
- Volume
- 434
- Issue
- 7034
- Pages
- 697-697
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W2033218781
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: DNA barcoding is no substitute for taxonomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/434697b
- The paper
- Ebach, M. C., & Holdrege, C. (2005). DNA barcoding is no substitute for taxonomy. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/434697b
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
