The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Are plant species inherently harder to discriminate than animal species using DNA barcoding markers?
Abstract
The ability to discriminate between species using barcoding loci has proved more difficult in plants than animals, raising the possibility that plant species boundaries are less well defined. Here, we review a selection of published barcoding data sets to compare species discrimination in plants vs. animals. Although the use of different genetic markers, analytical methods and depths of taxon sampling may complicate comparisons, our results using common metrics demonstrate that the number of species supported as monophyletic using barcoding markers is higher in animals (> 90%) than plants (~70%), even after controlling for the amount of parsimony‐informative information per species. This suggests that more than a simple lack of variability limits species discrimination in plants. Both animal and plant species pairs have variable size gaps between intra‐ and interspecific genetic distances, but animal species tend to have larger gaps than plants, even in relatively densely sampled genera. An analysis of 12 plant genera suggests that hybridization contributes significantly to variation in genetic discontinuity in plants. Barcoding success may be improved in some plant groups by careful choice of markers and appropriate sampling; however, overall fine‐scale species discrimination in plants relative to animals may be inherently more difficult because of greater levels of gene‐tree paraphyly.
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
Cited by
Product authenticity versus globalisation—The Tulsi case
Jürges, G., Sahi, V., Rios Rodriguez, D., Reich, E., Bhamra, S., Howard, C., Slater, A., & Nick, P. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0207763 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- FAZEKAS, A. J., KESANAKURTI, P. R., BURGESS, K. S., PERCY, D. M., GRAHAM, S. W., BARRETT, S. C. H., NEWMASTER, S. G., HAJIBABAEI, M., & HUSBAND, B. C.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology Resources
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-04-21
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- s1
- Pages
- 130-139
- ISSN
- 1755-098X (ISSN-L)
- 1755-0998
- OpenAlex
- W2156935855
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.65
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Are plant species inherently harder to discriminate than animal species using DNA barcoding markers? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02652.x
- The paper
- FAZEKAS, A. J., KESANAKURTI, P. R., BURGESS, K. S., PERCY, D. M., GRAHAM, S. W., BARRETT, S. C. H., NEWMASTER, S. G., HAJIBABAEI, M., & HUSBAND, B. C. (2009). Are plant species inherently harder to discriminate than animal species using DNA barcoding markers? Molecular Ecology Resources. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02652.x
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.