» Articles » PMID: 25849083

Delineating Species with DNA Barcodes: a Case of Taxon Dependent Method Performance in Moths

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2015 Apr 8
PMID 25849083
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The accelerating loss of biodiversity has created a need for more effective ways to discover species. Novel algorithmic approaches for analyzing sequence data combined with rapidly expanding DNA barcode libraries provide a potential solution. While several analytical methods are available for the delineation of operational taxonomic units (OTUs), few studies have compared their performance. This study compares the performance of one morphology-based and four DNA-based (BIN, parsimony networks, ABGD, GMYC) methods on two groups of gelechioid moths. It examines 92 species of Finnish Gelechiinae and 103 species of Australian Elachistinae which were delineated by traditional taxonomy. The results reveal a striking difference in performance between the two taxa with all four DNA-based methods. OTU counts in the Elachistinae showed a wider range and a relatively low (ca. 65%) OTU match with reference species while OTU counts were more congruent and performance was higher (ca. 90%) in the Gelechiinae. Performance rose when only monophyletic species were compared, but the taxon-dependence remained. None of the DNA-based methods produced a correct match with non-monophyletic species, but singletons were handled well. A simulated test of morphospecies-grouping performed very poorly in revealing taxon diversity in these small, dull-colored moths. Despite the strong performance of analyses based on DNA barcodes, species delineated using single-locus mtDNA data are best viewed as OTUs that require validation by subsequent integrative taxonomic work.

Citing Articles

Phylogeography of Microphis retzii (Bleeker, 1856) and Microphis brachyurus (Bleeker, 1854) in the Pacific.

Hay V, Mennesson M, Carpentier C, Dahruddin H, Sauri S, Limmon G J Fish Biol. 2024; 106(2):602-620.

PMID: 39506330 PMC: 11842185. DOI: 10.1111/jfb.15981.


Delimiting Species with Single-Locus DNA Sequences.

Hubert N, Phillips J, Hanner R Methods Mol Biol. 2024; 2744:53-76.

PMID: 38683311 DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-3581-0_3.


Species delimitation of tea plants (Camellia sect. Thea) based on super-barcodes.

Jiang Y, Yang J, Folk R, Zhao J, Liu J, He Z BMC Plant Biol. 2024; 24(1):181.

PMID: 38468197 PMC: 10926627. DOI: 10.1186/s12870-024-04882-3.


A survey of aquatic macroinvertebrates in a river from the dry corridor of Nicaragua using biological indices and DNA barcoding.

Mendoza-Ramirez B, Paiz-Medina L, Salvatierra-Suarez T, Hernandez N, Huete-Perez J Ecol Evol. 2022; 12(11):e9487.

PMID: 36349251 PMC: 9636505. DOI: 10.1002/ece3.9487.


Molecular phylogeny and phylogeography of the freshwater-fish genus Pethia (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in Sri Lanka.

Sudasinghe H, Ranasinghe T, Herath J, Wijesooriya K, Pethiyagoda R, Ruber L BMC Ecol Evol. 2021; 21(1):203.

PMID: 34758736 PMC: 8582130. DOI: 10.1186/s12862-021-01923-5.


References
1.
Dinca V, Lukhtanov V, Talavera G, Vila R . Unexpected layers of cryptic diversity in wood white Leptidea butterflies. Nat Commun. 2011; 2:324. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1329. View

2.
Jorger K, Norenburg J, Wilson N, Schrodl M . Barcoding against a paradox? Combined molecular species delineations reveal multiple cryptic lineages in elusive meiofaunal sea slugs. BMC Evol Biol. 2012; 12:245. PMC: 3573953. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-12-245. View

3.
Posada D . jModelTest: phylogenetic model averaging. Mol Biol Evol. 2008; 25(7):1253-6. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msn083. View

4.
Jones M, Ghoorah A, Blaxter M . jMOTU and Taxonerator: turning DNA Barcode sequences into annotated operational taxonomic units. PLoS One. 2011; 6(4):e19259. PMC: 3081837. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019259. View

5.
Hendrich L, Pons J, Ribera I, Balke M . Mitochondrial cox1 sequence data reliably uncover patterns of insect diversity but suffer from high lineage-idiosyncratic error rates. PLoS One. 2011; 5(12):e14448. PMC: 3010977. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014448. View