Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 499

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An In silico approach for the evaluation of DNA barcodes

Open access
Ficetola, Gentile, Coissac, Eric, Zundel, Stéphanie, Riaz, Tiayyba, Shehzad, Wasim, Bessière, Julien, Taberlet, Pierre, Pompanon, François·2010·BMC Genomics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: DNA barcoding is a key tool for assessing biodiversity in both taxonomic and environmental studies. Essential features of barcodes include their applicability to a wide spectrum of taxa and their ability to identify even closely related species. Several DNA regions have been proposed as barcodes and the region selected strongly influences the output of a study. However, formal comparisons between barcodes remained limited until now. Here we present a standard method for evaluating barcode quality, based on the use of a new bioinformatic tool that performs in silico PCR over large databases. We illustrate this approach by comparing the taxonomic coverage and the resolution of several DNA regions already proposed for the barcoding of vertebrates. To assess the relationship between in silico and in vitro PCR, we also developed specific primers amplifying different species of Felidae, and we tested them using both kinds of PCR RESULTS: Tests on specific primers confirmed the correspondence between in silico and in vitro PCR. Nevertheless, results of in silico and in vitro PCRs can be somehow different, also because tuning PCR conditions can increase the performance of primers with limited taxonomic coverage. The in silico evaluation of DNA barcodes showed a strong variation of taxonomic coverage (i.e., universality): barcodes based on highly degenerated primers and those corresponding to the conserved region of the Cyt-b showed the highest coverage. As expected, longer barcodes had a better resolution than shorter ones, which are however more convenient for ecological studies analysing environmental samples. CONCLUSIONS: In silico PCR could be used to improve the performance of a study, by allowing the preliminary comparison of several DNA regions in order to identify the most appropriate barcode depending on the study aims.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2164-11-434

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 499

Metadata

Authors
Ficetola, G., Coissac, E., Zundel, S., Riaz, T., Shehzad, W., Bessière, J., Taberlet, P., & Pompanon, F.
Venue
BMC Genomics
Published
2010
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
434
ISSN
1471-2164 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2132964596
Cited by
499
References
1
FWCI
10.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: An In silico approach for the evaluation of DNA barcodes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2164-11-434
The paper
Ficetola, G., Coissac, E., Zundel, S., Riaz, T., Shehzad, W., Bessière, J., Taberlet, P., & Pompanon, F. (2010). An In silico approach for the evaluation of DNA barcodes. BMC Genomics. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-11-434

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.