Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 722

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Plant DNA barcodes and a community phylogeny of a tropical forest dynamics plot in Panama

Open access
Kress, W. John, Erickson, David L., Jones, F. Andrew, Swenson, Nathan G., Perez, Rolando, Sanjur, Oris, Bermingham, Eldredge·2009·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The assembly of DNA barcode libraries is particularly relevant within species-rich natural communities for which accurate species identifications will enable detailed ecological forensic studies. In addition, well-resolved molecular phylogenies derived from these DNA barcode sequences have the potential to improve investigations of the mechanisms underlying community assembly and functional trait evolution. To date, no studies have effectively applied DNA barcodes sensu strictu in this manner. In this report, we demonstrate that a three-locus DNA barcode when applied to 296 species of woody trees, shrubs, and palms found within the 50-ha Forest Dynamics Plot on Barro Colorado Island (BCI), Panama, resulted in >98% correct identifications. These DNA barcode sequences are also used to reconstruct a robust community phylogeny employing a supermatrix method for 281 of the 296 plant species in the plot. The three-locus barcode data were sufficient to reliably reconstruct evolutionary relationships among the plant taxa in the plot that are congruent with the broadly accepted phylogeny of flowering plants (APG II). Earlier work on the phylogenetic structure of the BCI forest dynamics plot employing less resolved phylogenies reveals significant differences in evolutionary and ecological inferences compared with our data and suggests that unresolved community phylogenies may have increased type I and type II errors. These results illustrate how highly resolved phylogenies based on DNA barcode sequence data will enhance research focused on the interface between community ecology and evolution.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0909820106

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 722

Metadata

Authors
Kress, W. J., Erickson, D. L., Jones, F. A., Swenson, N. G., Perez, R., Sanjur, O., & Bermingham, E.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2009-11-03
Volume
106
Issue
44
Pages
18621-18626
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2170893305
Cited by
722
References
2
FWCI
31.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.