The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identification of Birds through DNA Barcodes
Open accessAbstract
Short DNA sequences from a standardized region of the genome provide a DNA barcode for identifying species. Compiling a public library of DNA barcodes linked to named specimens could provide a new master key for identifying species, one whose power will rise with increased taxon coverage and with faster, cheaper sequencing. Recent work suggests that sequence diversity in a 648-bp region of the mitochondrial gene, cytochrome c oxidase I (COI), might serve as a DNA barcode for the identification of animal species. This study tested the effectiveness of a COI barcode in discriminating bird species, one of the largest and best-studied vertebrate groups. We determined COI barcodes for 260 species of North American birds and found that distinguishing species was generally straightforward. All species had a different COI barcode(s), and the differences between closely related species were, on average, 18 times higher than the differences within species. Our results identified four probable new species of North American birds, suggesting that a global survey will lead to the recognition of many additional bird species. The finding of large COI sequence differences between, as compared to small differences within, species confirms the effectiveness of COI barcodes for the identification of bird species. This result plus those from other groups of animals imply that a standard screening threshold of sequence difference (10x average intraspecific difference) could speed the discovery of new animal species. The growing evidence for the effectiveness of DNA barcodes as a basis for species identification supports an international exercise that has recently begun to assemble a comprehensive library of COI sequences linked to named specimens.
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
Cited by
bold : The Barcode of Life Data System (http://www.barcodinglife.org)
RATNASINGHAM, S., & HEBERT, P. D. N. (2007) · Molecular Ecology Notes · doi:10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x · Cited by 6,376
Self-citationDNA 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
Quantitative criteria for species delimitation
TOBIAS, J. A., SEDDON, N., SPOTTISWOODE, C. N., PILGRIM, J. D., FISHPOOL, L. D. C., & COLLAR, N. J. (2010) · Ibis · doi:10.1111/j.1474-919x.2010.01051.x · Cited by 1,092
Comparative genomics reveals insights into avian genome evolution and adaptation
Zhang, G., Li, C., Li, Q., Li, B., Larkin, D. M., Lee, C., Storz, J. F., Antunes, A., Greenwold, M. J., Meredith, R. W., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1251385 · Cited by 1,055
Jackson, J. K., Battle, J. M., White, B. P., Pilgrim, E. M., Stein, E. D., Miller, P. E., & Sweeney, B. W. (2014) · Freshwater Science · doi:10.1086/675225 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Hebert, P. D. N., Stoeckle, M. Y., Zemlak, T. S., & Francis, C. M.
- Venue
- PLoS Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2004-09-28
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e312
- ISSN
- 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7885
- OpenAlex
- W2040452926
- Cited by
- 2,653
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 59.89
- 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: Identification of Birds through DNA Barcodes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312
- The paper
- Hebert, P. D. N., Stoeckle, M. Y., Zemlak, T. S., & Francis, C. M. (2004). Identification of Birds through DNA Barcodes. PLoS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312
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.