Cited by 126Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyInvertebrate Taxonomy and EcologyEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera fauna of Churchill (Manitoba, Canada): insights into biodiversity patterns from DNA barcoding

Open access
Zhou, Xin, Jacobus, Luke M., DeWalt, R. Edward, Adamowicz, Sarah J., Hebert, Paul D. N.·2010·Journal of the North American Benthological Society

Abstract

The insect orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) are particularly important for freshwater ecological and biomonitoring studies, but difficulties in their identification to species level impede research. DNA barcoding provides a solution to this problem by linking newly collected specimens to a reference library of authoritatively identified specimens. Here, we consider the ways in which patterns of intraspecific and interspecific genetic divergences in the barcode region can provide rapid insights into the taxonomic identity, morphological features, and geographical distributions of species. Our study led to a >5× increase in the EPT fauna, including 68 caddisfly, 37 mayfly, and 7 stonefly species, recorded from Churchill. DNA barcoding also aided detection of rare taxa, allowed identification of otherwise unidentifiable life stages, revealed several potentially new species of caddisflies and mayflies, and suggested the presence of cryptic species. The new insights into this fauna and the strong congruence between morphological and molecular characters affirm the utility of DNA barcoding for rapid characterization of the diversity of EPT faunas. We also explore the phenology and habitat preferences of Churchill’s trichopterans and demonstrate that comprehensive sampling is important for documenting biodiversity through DNA barcoding.

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 · 10.1899/09-121.1

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. BASQUIN, P., AND R. ROUGERIE. 2009. Contribution to the knowledge of the genus Maltagorea Bouyer, 1993: description of a new species revealed by a combination of morphological characters and DNA barcoding (Lepidoptera, Saturniinae). Bulletin de la Societe En- tomologique de France 114:257-264.
  2. FLOYD, M. A. 1995. Larvae of the caddisfly genus Oecetis (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) in North America. Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey, New Series 10:1-85.
  3. HARPER, F., N. H. ANDERSON, AND P. P. HARPER. 1995. Emergence of lotic mayflies (Ephemeroptera) in the Cascade Range of Oregon. Pages 207-222 in L. D. Corkum and J. J. H. Ciborowski (editors). Current directions in research on Ephemeroptera. Canadian Scholars' Press, Inc., Toronto, Ontario.
  4. MCCAFFERTY, W. P., R. D. WALTZ, J. M. WEBB, AND L. M. JACOBUS. 2005. Revision of Heterocloeon McDunnough (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Journal of Insect Science 35: 1-11.
  5. RICKER, W. E. 1938. Notes on specimens of American Plecoptera in European collections. Transactions of the Royal Canadian Institute 22:129-156.
  6. ROSS, H. H. 1944. The caddisflies or Trichoptera of Illinois. Bulletin of the Illinois Natural History Survey 23:1-326.
  7. WALTZ, R. D., AND S. K. BURIAN. 2008. Ephemeroptera. Pages 181-236 in R. W. Merritt, K. W. Cummins, and M. B. Berg (editors). An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. 4 th edition.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, X., Jacobus, L. M., DeWalt, R. E., Adamowicz, S. J., & Hebert, P. D. N.
Affiliations
  • University of Guelph (CA)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • Illinois Natural History Survey (US)
Venue
Journal of the North American Benthological Society
Published
2010-09
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
814-837
ISSN
  • 0887-3593 (ISSN-L)
  • 1937-237X
OpenAlex
W2131347012
Cited by
126
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the North American Benthological Society (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Genome Canada
  • University of Manitoba
  • Ontario Genomics Institute
  • Churchill Northern Studies Centre
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Keywords
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, aquatic insects, DNA barcoding, species identification, cryptic species, new species, genetic divergence, Churchill, Manitoba, insect phenology, habitat preference, biodiversity documentation

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