Taxonomy and the mediocrity of DNA barcoding - Some remarks on PACKER et al. 2009: DNA barcoding and the mediocrity of morphology

Arthropod Systematics and Phylogeny

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 143-150

  Hołyński, Roman B ^a  

^a NONE   (Poland)

Author keywords

Barcoding; Basic research; Morphological data; Taxonomy

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651307930     PISSN: 18637221     EISSN: 18648312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. ANDOLFATTO, P 2005. Adaptive evolution of non-coding DNA in Drosophila. - Nature 437: 1149.
2. BÄCKER, H., M. FANENBRUCK & J.W. WÄGELE 2008. A forgotten homology supporting the monophyly of Tracheata: The subcoxa of insects and myriapods re-visited. - Zoologischer Anzeiger 247(3): 185-207.
3. BIÉMONT, C. & C. VIEIRA 2006. Junk DNA as an evolutionary force. - Nature 443: 521-524.
4. st Century. - Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 78: 225-252.
5. BRÜSTLE, L. & J. MUONA 2009. Life history studies versus genetic markers - the case of Hylochares cruentatus (Coleoptera: Eucnemidae). - Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 47(4): 337-343.
6. BUHAY, J.E. 2009. "COI-like" sequences are becoming problematic in molecular systematic and DNA barcoding studies. - Journal of Crustacean Biology 29(1): 96-110.
7. CAMERON, S., D. RUBINOFF & K. WILL 2006. Who will actually use DNA barcoding and what will it cost? - Systematic Biology 55(5): 844-847.
8. CARRANZA, S., G. GIRIBET, C. RIBERA, J. BAGUÑÀ & M. RIUTORT 1996. Evidence that two types of 18S rDNA coexist in the genome of Dugesia (Schmidtea) mediterranea (Platyhelminthes, Turbellaria, Tricladida). - Molecular Biology and Evolution 13(6): 824-832.
9. CHECK, E. 2006. It's the junk that makes us human. - Nature 444: 130-131.
10. CHECK, E. 2007. Genome project turns up evolutionary surprises. - Nature 447: 760-761.
11. EBACH, M.C. & C. HOLDREDGE 2005. More taxonomy, not DNA barcoding. - Bioscience 55(10): 822-823.
12. FREUDENSTEIN, J.V., K.M. PICKETT, M.P. SIMMONS & J.W. WENZEL 2003. From basepairs to birdsongs: phylogenetic data in the age of genomics. - Cladistics 19: 333-347.
13. GATESY, J. & P. ARCTANDER 2000. Hidden morphological support for the phylogenetic placement of Pseudoryx nghetinhensis with bovine bovids: a combined analysis of gross anatomical evidence and DNA sequences from five genes. - Systematic Biology 49(3): 515-538.
14. GATESY, J., P. O'GRADY & R.H. BAKER 1999. Corroboration among data sets in simultaneous analysis: hidden support for phylogenetic relationships among higher level artiodactyl taxa. - Cladistics 15: 271-313.
15. GUERRA-GARCÍA, J.M., F. ESPINOSA & J.C. GARCÍA-GÓMEZ 2008. Trends in taxonomy today: an overview about the main topics in taxonomy. - Zoologica Baetica 19: 15-49.
16. HOŁYŃSKA, M. 2000. Revision of the Australasian species of the genus Mesocyclops Sars, 1914 (Copepoda: Cyclopidae). - Annales Zoologici 50: 363-447.
17. HOŁYŃSKA, M., J.W. REID & H. UEDA 2003. Genus Mesocyclops Sars, 1914. - Guides to the Identification of the Microinvertebrates of the Continental Waters of the World 20: 12-213.
18. HOŁYŃSKI, R.B. 1993. A reassessment of the internal classification of the Buprestidae LEACH (Coleoptera). - Crystal (Zool.) 1: 1-42.
19. HOŁYŃSKI, R.B. 2001. Crisis management in taxonomy: medicine or poison? - Coleopterists Bulletin 55(2): 243-247.
20. HOŁYŃSKI, R.B. 2005. Philosophy of science from a taxonomist's perspective. - Genus 16(4): 469-502.
21. HOŁYŃSKI, R.B. 2008. God save us from friends, or: How to ensure taxonomy against passing away by dint of a successful operation? - Polish Taxonomical Monographs 15: 3-54.
22. HUYS, R., J. LLEWELLYN-HUGHES, P.D. OLSON & K. NAGASAWA 2006. Small subunit rDNA and Bayesian inference reveal Pectenophilus ornatus (Copepoda incertae sedis) as highly transformed Mytilicolidae, and support assignment of Chondracanthidae and Xarifidae to Lichomolgoidea (Cyclopoida). - Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 87: 403- 425.
23. KANNAN, R. 2007. New bird descriptions without proper voucher specimens: reflections after the Bugun Liocichla case. - Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 104(1): 12-18.
24. KNAPP, S., R.M. BATEMAN, N.R. CHALMERS, C.J. HUMPHRIES, P.S. RAINBOW, A.B. SMITH, P.D. TAYLOR, R.I. VANE-WRIGHT & M. WILKINSON 2002. Taxonomy needs evolution, not revolution. - Nature 418: 559.
25. KRELL, F.-T. 2000. Impact factors aren't relevant to taxonomy. - Nature 405: 507-508.
26. KRELL, F.-T. 2002. Why impact factors don't work for taxonomy. - Nature 415: 957.
27. KRELL, F.-T. 2006. Irrungen, Wirrungen und neue Entwicklungen zu Impact und Impact Factor. - Gesellschaft für Biologische Systematik News 17: 64-67.
28. LARSEN, T.B. 2005. Hazards of butterfly collecting. 'Fossil on a pin' - Keele University, UK, 1993. - Entomologist's Record and Journal of Variation 117: 109-111.
29. LEWIS, J. 2000. Sześć miliardów - i codalej? [Six billion - and what further?] - Świat Nauki 10(12): 13-14.
30. LÜCKING, R. 2008. Taxonomy: a discipline on the brink of extinction. Are DNA barcode scanners the future of biodiversity research? - Archives des Sciences 61(2): 75-88.
31. MARTENS, J. & N. BAHR 2007. Dokumentation neuer Vogel-Taxa - Bericht für 2005. - Vogelwarte 45: 119-134.
32. MEFFRE, S., A.J. CRAWFORD & P.G. QUILTY 2006. Arc-continent collision forming a large island between New Caledonia and New Zealand in the Oligocene. - Australian Earth Sciences Convention: 1-3.
33. MEIER, R., K. SHIYANG, G. VAIDYA, P.K.L. NG 2006. DNA barcoding and taxonomy in Diptera: a tale of high intraspecific variability and low identification success. - Systematic Biology 55(5): 715-728.
34. MESSENGER, S.L & J.A. MCGUIRE 1998. Morphology, molecules, and the phylogenetics of cetaceans. - Systematic Biology 47(1): 90-124.
35. MEYER, C.P. & G. PAULAY 2005. DNA barcoding: error rates based on comprehensive sampling. - PLoS Biology 3, 12, e422: 2229-2238.
36. OLSON, S.L. 1981. The museum tradition in ornithology - a response to Ricklefs. - Auk 98(1): 193-195.
37. PACKER, L., J. GIBBS, C. SHEFFIELD & R. HANNER 2009. DNA barcoding and the mediocrity of morphology. - Molecular Ecology Resources 9, Suppl.1: 42-50.
38. ROHRER, H. 2006. Key-players for the scientific progress. - Abstr. Forum on Science Frontiers, IV 2006: [Sep.: 1-4].
39. SCHELLART, W.P. 2007. North-eastward subduction followed by slab detachment to explain ophiolite obduction and Early Miocene volcanism in Northland, New Zealand. - Terra Nova 19(3): 211-218.
40. SEIFERT, B. & A.V. GOROPASHNAYA 2004. Ideal phenotypes and mismatching haplotypes - errors of mtDNA treeing in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) detected by standardized morphometry. - Organisms Diversity and Evolution 4: 295- 305.
41. SONG, H., J. BUHAY, M.F. WHITING & K.A. CRANDALL 2008. Many species in one: DNA barcoding overestimates the number of species when nuclear mitochondrial pseudogenes are coamplified. - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 105(36): 13486-13491.
42. TINN, O. & T.H. OAKLEY 2008. Erratic rates of molecular evolution and incongruence of fossil and molecular divergence time estimates in Ostracoda (Crustacea). - Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 48: 157-167.
43. TREWICK, S.A. 2008. DNA barcoding is not enough: mismatch of taxonomy and genealogy in New Zealand grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae). - Cladistics 24: 240-254.
44. VALDECASAS, A.G., S. CASTROVIEJO & L.F. MARCUS 2000. Reliance on the citation index undermines the study of biodiversity. - Nature 403: 698.
45. VAN DE VELDE, I. 1984a. Introduction of new diagnostic characters in Mesocyclops, with African species as an example. - Crustaceana 7, Suppl.: 404-409.
46. VAN DE VELDE, I. 1984b. Revision of the African species of the genus Mesocyclops Sars, 1914 (Copepoda: Cyclopidae). - Hydrobiologia 109: 3-66.
47. VOGLER, A.P & M.T. MONAGHAN 2007. Recent advances in DNA taxonomy. - Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 45(1): 1-10.
48. WERNER, Y.L. 2006. The case of impact factor versus taxonomy: a proposal. - Journal of Natural History 40(21-22): 1285- 1286.
49. WHEELER, Q.D. 2008. Undisciplined thinking: morphology and Hennig's unfinished revolution. - Systematic Entomology 33(1): 2-7.
50. WHEELER, Q.D. 2009. Revolutionary thoughts in taxonomy: declarations of independence and interdependence. - Zoologia 26(1): 1-4.
51. WHEELER, Q.D. & A.G. VALDECASAS 2007. Taxonomy: myths and misconceptions. - Anales del Jardín Botánico de Madrid 64(2): 237-241.
52. WHITE, D.J., J.N. WOLFF, M. PIERSON & N.J. GEMMELL 2008. Revealing the hidden complexities of mtDNA inheritance. - Molecular Ecology 17: 4925-4942.
53. WILL, K.W., B.D. MISHLER & Q.D. WHEELER 2005. The perils of DNA barcoding and the need for integrative taxonomy. - Systematic Biology 54(5): 844-851.
54. WIŚNIEWSKI, A. 2006. Dlaczego humaniści nie sa{ogonek} wielbła{ogonek}dami, czyli o ocenie parametrycznej jednostek naukowych [Why humanists are not camels, or on the parametric evaluation of sientific institutions]. - Nauka [2006] 1: 121-128.
55. WYNGAARD, G.A., M. HOŁYŃSKA & J. SCHULTE 2008. Phylogenetic utility of combined molecules and morphology in the freshwater copepod Mesocyclops (Crustacea: Cyclopidae). - Abstr. 10th International Conference on Copepoda: 98.