The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation
Abstract
Within uncharacterized groups, DNA barcodes, short DNA sequences that are present in a wide range of species, can be used to assign organisms into species. We propose an automatic procedure that sorts the sequences into hypothetical species based on the barcode gap, which can be observed whenever the divergence among organisms belonging to the same species is smaller than divergence among organisms from different species. We use a range of prior intraspecific divergence to infer from the data a model‐based one‐sided confidence limit for intraspecific divergence. The method, called Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD), then detects the barcode gap as the first significant gap beyond this limit and uses it to partition the data. Inference of the limit and gap detection are then recursively applied to previously obtained groups to get finer partitions until there is no further partitioning. Using six published data sets of metazoans, we show that ABGD is computationally efficient and performs well for standard prior maximum intraspecific divergences (a few per cent of divergence for the five data sets), except for one data set where less than three sequences per species were sampled. We further explore the theoretical limitations of ABGD through simulation of explicit speciation and population genetics scenarios. Our results emphasize in particular the sensitivity of the method to the presence of recent speciation events, via (unrealistically) high rates of speciation or large numbers of species. In conclusion, ABGD is fast, simple method to split a sequence alignment data set into candidate species that should be complemented with other evidence in an integrative taxonomic approach.
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
Kimura, M. (1980) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf01731581 · Cited by 29,778
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
Cited by
A DNA-Based Registry for All Animal Species: The Barcode Index Number (BIN) System
Ratnasingham, S., & Hebert, P. D. N. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066213 · Cited by 2,301
Environmental DNA – An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity
Thomsen, P. F., & Willerslev, E. (2015) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019 · Cited by 2,082
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
Molecular diversity of Uzbekistan’s fishes assessed with DNA barcoding
Sheraliev, B., & Peng, Z. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96487-1 · Cited by 42
Roussel, T., Halary, S., Duval, C., Piquet, B., Cadoret, J.-P., Vernès, L., Bernard, C., & Marie, B. (2023) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1093/jambio/lxad159 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- PUILLANDRE, N., LAMBERT, A., BROUILLET, S., & ACHAZ, G.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-08-29
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1864-1877
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2127499811
- Cited by
- 3,324
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 47.48
- 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
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.