DNA barcoding: how it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics.

By Mehrdad Hajibabaei, Gregory A. C. Singer, Paul D. N. Hebert, D. Hickey. Trends in Genetics, 2007

1,162 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6ec47b2b5015203710649669e6809161357e1f15

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Genetics

In Molecular Biology

Citations in the corpus

Barcoding diatoms: evaluation of the V4 subregion on the 18S rRNA gene, including new primers and protocols (2011, background): “This means that a substantial reference volume is already available (Hajibabaei et al. 2007), even though identification quality often is not verifiable and therefore does not meet DNA barcoding requirements.”
Current progress in DNA barcoding and future implications for entomology (2011, methodology): “The results of barcoding can only suggest new species candidates (Witt et al. 2006; Hajibabaei et al. 2007; Miller 2007; Waugh 2007) as well as other valuable supporting information (e.g. distribution, life history, host plants) for taxonomic studies (e.g. integrative taxonomy: Dayrat 2005, see…”
DNA barcodes of fish of the Scotia Sea, Antarctica indicate priority groups for taxonomic and systematics focus (2008, background): “Barcoding has the power to provide valuable insight into patterns of genetic divergence affected by species-level or ecological variation (Hajibabaei et al. 2007).”
The campaign to DNA barcode all fishes, FISH-BOL. (2009, background): “Indeed, high-throughput barcoding is complementary to phylogenetic studies because it sheds light on divergent lineages for subsequent inclusion in such analyses (Hajibabaei et al., 2007).”
DNA barcoding for ecologists. (2009, background): “The possibility of analyzing complex mixtures of DNA fragments, either by DNA hybridization on microarrays [30, 78 ] or in association with the new sequencing technologies (Box3), opens newhorizons for ecologists.Weanticipate that DNA-based biodiversity assessment using environmental samples will be”
In search of mitochondrial markers for resolving the phylogeny of cyclophyllidean tapeworms (Platyhelminthes, Cestoda) — a test study with Davaineidae (2008, background): “The fragment of cox1 used in the present study was not the same region popularly chosen for barcoding in other metazoan taxa (a fragment of approx. 650 bp towards the 5 end of the gene; Hajibabaei et al. 2007), but is instead the latter half of the gene toward the 3end.”
Revealing secret liaisons: DNA barcoding changes our understanding of food webs (2010, methodology): “Yet, despite the potential power of molecular species characterisation (and, in particular, DNA ‘barcoding’; Hebert et al., 2004; Challis et al., 2007; Hajibabei et al., 2007; Ács et al., 2010; Nicholls et al., 2010), these techniques have rarely been used in food web studies.”
Extrapolations from field studies and known faunas converge on dramatically increased estimates of global microgastrine parasitoid wasp species richness (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) (2013, methodology): “To facilitate microgastrine species identification, this study also makes use of extensive preliminary genetic sampling using standardised genetic markers (DNA barcodes) (Hajibabaei et al., 2007).”
DNA barcoding in the red algal order Gelidiales: comparison of COI with rbc La nd verification of the "barcoding gap" (2010, background): “The utility of any barcoding locus depends upon both practical considerations such as universality and appropriate length (e.g. Hajibabaei et al., 2007), and also functional considerations such as level of sequence variation and presence of a clear barcoding gap between closely related species…”
Present state of the systematics of planktonic coccoid green algae of inland waters (2012, background): “For animals, part of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase c subunit I gene (COI, cox1) has been proposed and is now widely used (Hajibabaei et al., 2007).”
Towards the Optimization of eDNA/eRNA Sampling Technologies for Marine Biosecurity Surveillance (2021, background): “The use of tissue or blood samples from an individual to obtain a genetic signal alleviates issues surrounding taxonomic identification, while still relying on visual detection and collection of specimens at the sampled area [11].”
DNA Barcoding, species delineation and taxonomy: a historical perspective (2015, positive): “Since the initial proposal by Hebert and colleagues [6], DNA barcoding has established as a mature field of biodiversity sciences filing the conceptual gap between traditional taxonomy and different fields of molecular systematics [6-8].”
DNA Barcoding the Medusozoa using mtCOI (2010, methodology): “Although mtCOI has been shown to contain some phylogenetic information between closely related taxa (e.g. Bucklin et al., 2003, 2010), DNA barcodes generally lack sufficient phylogenetic signal at deeper levels (Hajibabaei et al., 2007).”