ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2016
Telling plant species apart with DNA: from barcodes to genomes.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 140 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
140 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Type Genomics: A Framework for Integrating Genomic Data into Biodiversity and Taxonomic Research.Systematic biology · 2025Guideline
- Plant species identification by genome skimming across the vascular plant tree of life.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- Conservation Status, Plastome Diversity, and Evolutionary Diversification of Three ArabianBiology · 2026Article
- DNA Barcoding and Comparative Chloroplast Marker Performance in Endemic Plants of Crete (Greece).Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- DNA barcodes analyses provide insights into species delineation and possible cryptic species in Amentotaxus (Taxaceae).BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- DNA-based identification of plants and the genomic nature of plant species differences.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Resolving Species Limits and Evolutionary Distinctiveness of the Libyan EndemicPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- Impact of invasive weed Parthenium hysterophorus (Asteraceae) on mosquito abundance and plant-feeding behavior in an arboviral endemic region in Kenya.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Chloroplast genome analysis reveals intraspecific variation and phylogenetic conflicts in Bletilla.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- High species discrimination inPlant diversity · 2025Article
- Article
- Scaling Up Species Delimitation From DNA Barcodes to Whole Organelle Genomes: Strong Evidence for Discordance Among Genes and Methods for the Red Alga Dasyclonium.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Identification of herbal medicine species of Lysimachia L. (Primulaceae) in Southern China using genome skimming.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Specimen Identification Through Multilocus Species Tree Constructed From Single-Copy Orthologs (SCOs): A Case Study inEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- Complete plastomes serve as desirable molecular makers for precise identification of Asparagus cochinchinensis (Asparagaceae) and nine other congeneric species frequently utilized as its adulterants.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
80 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Land plants underpin a multitude of ecosystem functions, support human livelihoods and represent a critically important component of terrestrial biodiversity-yet many tens of thousands of species await discovery, and plant identification remains a substantial challenge, especially where material is juvenile, fragmented or processed. In this opinion article, we tackle two main topics. Firstly, we provide a short summary of the strengths and limitations of plant DNA barcoding for addressing these issues. Secondly, we discuss options for enhancing current plant barcodes, focusing on increasing discriminatory power via either gene capture of nuclear markers or genome skimming. The former has the advantage of establishing a defined set of target loci maximizing efficiency of sequencing effort, data storage and analysis. The challenge is developing a probe set for large numbers of nuclear markers that works over sufficient phylogenetic breadth. Genome skimming has the advantage of using existing protocols and being backward compatible with existing barcodes; and the depth of sequence coverage can be increased as sequencing costs fall. Its non-targeted nature does, however, present a major informatics challenge for upscaling to large sample sets.This article is part of the themed issue 'From DNA barcodes to biomes'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.