O'Grady Lab
  • Home
  • News and Events
  • People
    • Current Members
    • Undergraduate Research
    • Past Members
  • Research
  • Publications
  • Data
    • Mitochondrial Primers
    • Nuclear Primers
    • Accession Numbers
  • Photos
  • Courses
  • Educational Outreach
  • Links

Review: Webb et al. (2011) DNA Barcoding of North American Ephemeroptera: Progress and Prospects

10/12/2012

3 Comments

 
Picture
This paper was a convincing argument for the promise of DNA barcoding taking over the world, basically. DNA barcoding of aquatic macroinvertebrates  is gaining backing as an extremely useful tool for taxonomic identification and research, and in turn,  application in bioassessment programs.  Some have argued that DNA barcoding is an unreliable way to identify aquatic macroinvertebrates, but this paper shoots those ideas down; (!!!) as it found that the average intraspecific divergence  was 12.5%, while the average intraspecific divergence was 1.97%. While there were some complications in identification, caused mainly by polyphyly and species complexes (which still need to be further studied and resolved,) in general these results indicate that DNA barcoding is, in general, a promising tool in aquatic macroinvertebrate taxonomy and bioassessment programs. 

Aside from the intra and interspecific  divergences being accurate, for the most part, this paper further points out that DNA barcoding is particularly useful for other reasons.  In addition to helping streamline the identification, delimitation, and discovery of species, DNA barcoding also gives consistent results across life stages, which is particularly important in aquatic ecology applications, as a large majority of benthic macroinvertebrates are immature. In many cases, taxonomy is based on adult male morphology, and identification of immatures, particularly early instars, is exceedingly time-consuming and requires substantial training. Additionally, specimens are often very tiny, and delicate, which can lead, in many cases, to missing gills, caudal filaments or even legs, which can in turn further complicate accurate identifications.  Furthermore, the use of DNA barcoding allows for data standardization, and thus a broader, more accurate  comparison of results.

This paper also suggested that much more work on North American Ephemeroptera  taxonomy and classification is required, as many currently recognized species are  highly divergent. Most of these confused species have complex histories of synonymy and reflect  the 60 year trend in North American mayfly systematics towards inclusive species concepts. Further taxonomic work that synthesizes a variety of identification and classification methods including morphological, biogeographic, ecological, behavioral and molecular techniques is required to test current species hypotheses, particularly of those unusually divergent Ephemeroptera species. DNA barcoding is one of the techniques that will be useful in this aim of achieving stable, supported species hypotheses. Re-examined and updated species hypotheses will allow us to identify aquatic insects more accurately and more efficiently, which will in turn allow us to determine and communicate the ecological characteristics of a species, such as phenology and tolerance to pollutants, and thus  improve our ability to utilize these organisms in bioassessment programs. 

Natalie Stauffer


3 Comments
Patrick
11/9/2012 02:43:24 am

Good summary of the paper. You should rework some of the text to include citations, particularly of those papers critical of the barcoding approach taken in this paper. I also think that the statement that this paper "shoots down" some of the criticisms of barcoding is too reaching. The issues are still there, in spite of the fact that this approach works well in the Ephemeroptera sampled. Here are some citations to get you started:

Reply
Patrick
11/9/2012 02:44:02 am

Rubinoff, D., S. Cameron, and K. Will. 2006. A Genomic Perspective on the Shortcomings of Mitochondrial DNA for "Barcoding" Identification. Journal of Heredity. 97(6):581-594

Rubinoff, D. 2006. DNA Barcoding evolves into the Familiar. Conservation Biology. 20:1548-1549.

Cameron, S., D. Rubinoff and K. Will. 2006. Who Will Actually Use DNA Barcoding and What Will it Cost Systematic Biology. 55: 844-847.

Rubinoff, D. 2006. Utility of Mitochondrial DNA Barcodes in species conservation. Conservation Biology 20:1026-1033.

Rubinoff, D., S. Cameron, and K. Will. 2006. Are plant DNA barcodes a search for the Holy Grail Trends in Ecology and Evolution.21:1-2.

Rubinoff, D. and B.S. Holland. 2005. Between Two Extremes: Mitochondrial DNA is neither the Panacea nor the Nemesis of Phylogenetic and Taxonomic Inference. Systematic Biology 54: 952-961.

Will, K. and D. Rubinoff. 2004. Myth of the molecule: DNA barcodes for species cannot replace morphology for identification and classification. Cladistics 20:47-55.

Reply
Aimee Aimee
10/30/2017 05:52:18 am

<a href=" http://machinesembroidery.weebly.com/ "> Machinesembroidery weebly .com </a>

Thank you for a great explanation. I was looking online for a similar idea and really appreciate it

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Patrick

    Professor
    Cornell University

    Archives

    April 2018
    March 2018
    August 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    September 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    January 2015
    October 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    September 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    January 2012
    November 2011
    October 2011
    May 2011
    February 2011

    Categories

    All
    1090
    1091
    Alumni
    Aquatic Insects
    Arizona
    Asteia
    Barcoding
    Bennett
    Blog
    Career
    Celebrations
    Chelsea
    Climate Change
    Cornell
    Craft
    Dicranota
    Dolichopodidae
    Drosophila
    Ephydra
    Ephydridae
    Field Work
    Funding
    Goodman
    Hawaiian Drosophila
    Keys
    Kidwell
    Lapoint
    Limonia
    Magnacca
    Marrack
    Montana
    Nesophrosyne
    New Species
    Ogrady
    Ort
    Paceyn
    Pak
    Panbiogeography
    Pediciidae
    Peterson
    Phylogenetic Methods
    Publications
    Readings
    Rhaphidolabis
    Scaptomyza
    Scatella
    Schedule
    Stauffer
    Sylvain
    Talks
    Taxonomy
    Tipula
    Undergraduates
    Unicorns
    Whiteman Lab
    Wojciechowski
    Wolbachia
    Wyoming
    Yeast And Fungi

    RSS Feed