ArticlePloS one2020
BOLD and GenBank revisited - Do identification errors arise in the lab or in the sequence libraries?
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.
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
45 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mitogenomic and phylogenomic analyses identify a cohesive Western Atlantic lineage within the Narcine complex (Torpediniformes: Narcinidae).Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Species Determination Within the Felidae Family Using mtDNA Minibarcoding.Animal genetics · 2026Article
- Invisible invaders: A new warning flag for molecularly detected alien species (MODAS) in databases and information systems.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- DNA-based identification of anadromous fishes (Alosa spp., Family Clupeidae) in stomach contents of marine groundfish.Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
- Integrative Assessment of Hong Kong Chironomidae (Diptera) Shows High Species Richness Linked to Spatial and Environmental Factors.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Distance-decay reveals contrasting effects of land-use types on arthropod community homogenisation.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Genome-wide phylogeny reshapes our understanding of the evolution of deep-sea dragonfishes, bristlemouths, viperfishes, and allies (Stomiiformes).BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- DNA metabarcoding analysis of stomach flushing contents reveals the exceptionally diverse diet of the golden alpine salamander.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A taxonomically reliable DNA barcode reference library for North Sea macrobenthos.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Dataset of Grey plover (Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- DNA barcoding for elasmobranch diversity assessment in Thailand: Its advantages and limitations.PloS one · 2025Article
- Rapid on-site universal vertebrate species identification via multi-barcode nanopore sequencing.PloS one · 2025Article
- Identification of BOLD engine deficiencies and suggestions for improvement based on a curated Tachina (Diptera) record set.PloS one · 2025Article
- Most soil and litter arthropods are unidentifiable based on current DNA barcode reference libraries.Current zoology · 2024Article
- WiPFIM: A digital platform for interlinking biocollections of wild plants, fruits, associated insects, and their molecular barcodes.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- The complete annotated plastome sequences of six genera in the tropical woody Polygonaceae.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- The Diversity of Parasitoids and Their Role in the Control of the Siberian Moth,Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Applications of biological knowledge, such as forensics, often require the determination of biological materials to a species level. As such, DNA-based approaches to identification, particularly DNA barcoding, are attracting increased interest. The capacity of DNA barcodes to assign newly encountered specimens to a species relies upon access to informatics platforms, such as BOLD and GenBank, which host libraries of reference sequences and support the comparison of new sequences to them. As parameterization of these libraries expands, DNA barcoding has the potential to make valuable contributions in diverse applied contexts. However, a recent publication called for caution after finding that both platforms performed poorly in identifying specimens of 17 common insect species. This study follows up on this concern by asking if the misidentifications reflected problems in the reference libraries or in the query sequences used to test them. Because this reanalysis revealed that missteps in acquiring and analyzing the query sequences were responsible for most misidentifications, a workflow is described to minimize such errors in future investigations. The present study also revealed the limitations imposed by the lack of a polished species-level taxonomy for many groups. In such cases, applications can be strengthened by mapping the geographic distributions of sequence-based species proxies rather than waiting for the maturation of formal taxonomic systems based on morphology.
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.