Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 95 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Towards a conceptual and operational union of bacterial systematics, ecology, and evolution

Open access
Cohan, Frederick M·2006·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

To completely understand the ecology of a bacterial community, we need to identify its ecologically distinct populations (ecotypes). The greatest promise for enumerating a community's constituent ecotypes is held by molecular approaches that identify bacterial ecotypes as DNA sequence clusters. These approaches succeed when ecotypes correspond with sequence clusters, but some models of bacterial speciation predict a one-to-many and others a many-to-one relationship between ecotypes and sequence clusters. A further challenge is that sequence-based phylogenies often contain a hierarchy of clusters and subclusters within clusters, and there is no widely accepted theory to guide systematists and ecologists to the size of cluster most likely to correspond to ecotypes. While present systematics attempts to use universal thresholds of sequence divergence to help demarcate species, the recently developed ‘community phylogeny’ approach assumes no universal thresholds, but demarcates ecotypes based on the analysis of a lineage's evolutionary dynamics. Theory-based approaches like this one can give a conceptual framework as well as operational criteria for hypothesizing the identity and membership of ecotypes from sequence data; ecology-based approaches can then confirm that the putative ecotypes are actually ecologically distinct. Bacterial ecotypes that are demonstrated to have a history of coexistence as ecologically distinct lineages (based on sequence analysis) and as a prognosis of future coexistence (based on ecological differences), are the fundamental units of bacterial ecology and evolution, and should be recognized by bacterial systematics.

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 · 10.1098/rstb.2006.1918

Cites

95 of 95 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

Show all 95 references

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Cohan, F. M.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2006-10-06
Volume
361
Issue
1475
Pages
1985-1996
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2141469832
Cited by
265
References
95
FWCI
10.18
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Towards a conceptual and operational union of bacterial systematics, ecology, and evolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2006.1918
The paper
Cohan, F. M. (2006). Towards a conceptual and operational union of bacterial systematics, ecology, and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2006.1918

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.