Cited by 91Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology

Cryptic biodiversity in streams: a comparison of macroinvertebrate communities based on morphological and DNA barcode identifications

Jackson, John K., Battle, Juliann M., White, Bryan P., Pilgrim, Erik M., Stein, Eric D., Miller, Peter E., Sweeney, Bernard W.·2014·Freshwater Science

Abstract

Species-level identifications are difficult or impossible for many larval aquatic macroinvertebrates. We described the taxonomic composition of macroinvertebrate communities from 5 coastal streams in 3 neighboring catchments in southern California. We compared taxonomic identifications based on deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) barcoding (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I [COI]) with morphological identifications of the same specimens. We examined 5870 individuals, and barcodes with sequence lengths >350 base pairs (bp) for 91% of those specimens. We used the naturally occurring gaps in divergence frequencies for each order (usually 2% level of genetic divergence) to delimit putative species for all taxonomic groups except Simulium (3%) and Baetis (1%). We identified 200 species across these 5 streams. We identified 104 more species via barcodes than via morphology (200 vs 96, a 108% increase). Richness increases were greatest for Chironomidae (60 more species), Ephemeroptera (10 species), Acari (10 species), and Trichoptera (6 species). Forty-five percent of the genera/species identified morphologically represented >2 species. Many (86) species identified with barcodes were represented by only 1 or 2 specimens and were found at only 1 stream. Thus, species rarity (either spatially or numerically) appears to be a common characteristic of these streams. Barcoding increased total richness at each site by 12 to 40 taxa over morphology alone, and increased the difference between reference and impact sites in terms of lost taxa. These results suggest that macroinvertebrate biodiversity in streams has been underestimated substantially in the past, as has the biodiversity lost in response to environmental stress. The potential of DNA barcoding will not be fully realized until we can assign traits, such as habitat preference, ecological function, and pollution tolerance, at the species level.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/675225

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jackson, J. K., Battle, J. M., White, B. P., Pilgrim, E. M., Stein, E. D., Miller, P. E., & Sweeney, B. W.
Affiliations
  • Stroud Water Research Center (US)
  • Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
  • University of Guelph (CA)
Venue
Freshwater Science
Published
2014-03
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
312-324
ISSN
  • 2161-9549 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-9565
OpenAlex
W2139394020
Cited by
91
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3
FWCI
8.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Freshwater Science (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Keywords
DNA barcoding, macroinvertebrate communities, stream biodiversity, cryptic species, species delimitation, morphological identification, COI, Chironomidae, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, mites, species richness, species rarity, coastal streams, environmental stress, biodiversity loss, Southern California

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