Abstract
Put simply, DNA barcoding (DNAB) is an identification method that aims to relate short, specific DNA fragments from unidentified specimens to sequences of previously identified voucher specimens through comparison of sequence divergence (Hebert et al. 2003). DNAB has produced noticeable success in terms of scientific citation and media coverage because it is technically feasible, commercially attractive, and philosophically acceptable to many scientists (Smith 2005). Irrespective of the utility to the general public (Cameron et al. 2006), and contrary to other DNA-based methods with taxonomic purposes (Vogler & Monaghan 2006), identification through DNAB is becoming widely available (www.barcodinglife.org). While DNAB is rejected by some taxonomists who view it as a competitor for funds, or a danger to taxonomy (Will & Rubinoff 2004; Ebach & Holdrege 2005), we argue for the complete incorporation of DNAB into integrative taxonomy (sensu Will et al. 2005).
References
Bello, E., Becerra, J.M. & Valdecasas, A.G. (1995) The burden is description, not identification. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 416–417.
Cameron, S., Rubinoff, D. & Will, K. (2006) Who will actually use DNA barcoding and what will it cost? Systematic Biology, 55, 844–847.
Ebach, M.C. & Holdrege, C. (2005) More taxonomy, not DNA barcoding. Bioscience, 55, 822–823.
Hebert, P.D.N., Cywinska, A. Ball, S.L. & deWaard, J.R. (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 313–321.
Kerr, K.C., Stoekle, M.Y., Dove, C.J., Weigt, L.A., Francis, C.M. & Hebert, D.N. (2007) Comprehensive DNA barcode coverage of North American birds. Molecular Ecology Notes, 7, 535–543.
May, R.M. (2004) Tomorrow’s taxonomy: collecting new species in the field will remain the rate-limiting step. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 359, 733–734.
Smith, V.S. (2005) DNA barcoding: Perspectives from a Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise in Taxonomy" (PEET) debate. Systematic Biology, 54, 841–844.
Vences, M. & Köhler, J. (2006) The current status of genetic exploration in amphibians: taxonomic and geographical disparities. In: Vences, M., Köhler, J., Ziegler, T. & Böhme, W. (Eds), Herpetologica Bonnensis II. Proceedings of the 13th Congress of the Societas Europaea Herpetologica. SHE, pp. 193–195.
Vences, M., Thomas, M., Bonett, R. & Vieites, D. (2005) Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNAB: chances and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 360, 1859–1868.
Vogler, A.P. & Monaghan, M.T. (2006) Recent advances in DNA taxonomy. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 45, 1–10.
Wheeler, Q.D. (2004) Taxonomic triage and the poverty of phylogeny. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 359, 571–583.
Wheeler, Q.D., & Valdecasas, A.G. (2005) Ten challenges to transform taxonomy. Graellsia, 61, 151–160.
Will, K.W., & Rubinoff, D. (2004) Myth of the molecule: DNA barcodes for species cannot replace morphology for identification and classification. Cladistics, 20, 47–55.
Will, K.W., Mishler, B.D. & Wheeler, Q.D. (2005) The perils of DNA barcoding and the need for integrative taxonomy. Systematic Biology, 54, 844–851.
Wilson, E.O. (2003) The encyclopedia of life. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 18, 77–80.