The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DNA Barcoding Will Often Fail to Discover New Animal Species over Broad Parameter Space
Open accessAbstract
With increasing force, genetic divergence of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is being argued as the primary tool for discovery of animal species. Two thresholds of single-gene divergence have been proposed: reciprocal monophyly, and 10 times greater genetic divergence between than within species (the "10x rule"). To explore quantitatively the utility of each approach, we couple neutral coalescent theory and the classical Bateson-Dobzhansky-Muller (BDM) model of speciation. The joint stochastic dynamics of these two processes demonstrate that both thresholds fail to "discover" many reproductively isolated lineages under a single incompatibility BDM model, especially when BDM loci have been subject to divergent selection. Only when populations have been isolated for > 4 million generations did these thresholds achieve error rates of < 10% under our model that incorporates variable population sizes. The high error rate evident in simulations is corroborated with six empirical data sets. These properties suggest that single-gene, high-throughput approaches to discovering new animal species will bias large-scale biodiversity surveys, particularly toward missing reproductively isolated lineages that have emerged by divergent selection or other mechanisms that accelerate reproductive isolation. Because single-gene thresholds for species discovery can result in substantial error at recent divergence times, they will misrepresent the correspondence between recently isolated populations and reproductively isolated lineages (= species).
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
Cites
The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation
Schluter, D. (2000) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198505235.001.0001 · Cited by 4,974
DAYRAT, B. (2005) · Biological Journal of the Linnean Society · doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2005.00503.x · Cited by 2,007
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
Self-citationWu, C.-I., & Ting, C.-T. (2004) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1269 · Cited by 532
Cited by
Analysis of biodiversity data suggests that mammal species are hidden in predictable places
Parsons, D. J., Pelletier, T. A., Wieringa, J. G., Duckett, D. J., & Carstens, B. C. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2103400119 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Hickerson, M. J., Meyer, C. P., & Moritz, C.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-10-01
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 729-739
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2127727801
- Cited by
- 417
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 19.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.