ArticleEcology and evolution2021
The efficacy of DNA barcoding in the classification, genetic differentiation, and biodiversity assessment of benthic macroinvertebrates.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance Profiles of Short DNA Barcode Segments for Family Level Detection of Asteraceae Within Asterales.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Delimiting species, revealing cryptic diversity in Molytinae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) weevil through DNA barcoding.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2024Article
- Delimiting species, revealing cryptic diversity, and population divergence in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau weevils through DNA barcoding.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Three steps towards comparability and standardization among molecular methods for characterizing insect communities.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Integrative species delimitation and five new species of lynx spiders (Araneae, Oxyopidae) in Taiwan.PloS one · 2024Article
- Review
- Identifying the Genetic Distance Threshold for Entiminae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Species Delimitation via COI Barcodes.Insects · 2022Article
- Ecological and Morphological Differentiation Among COI Haplotype Groups in the Plant Parasitic Nematode SpeciesJournal of nematology · 2022Article
- The efficacy of DNA barcoding in the classification, genetic differentiation, and biodiversity assessment of benthic macroinvertebrates.Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Macroinvertebrates have been recognized as key ecological indicators of aquatic environment and are the most commonly used approaches for water quality assessment. However, species identification of macroinvertebrates (especially of aquatic insects) proves to be very difficult due to the lack of taxonomic expertise in some regions and can become time-consuming. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of DNA barcoding for the classification of benthic macroinvertebrates and investigated the genetic differentiation in seven orders (Insecta: Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera, Coleoptera, and Odonata) from four large transboundary rivers of northwest China and further explored its potential application to biodiversity assessment. A total of 1,144 COI sequences, belonging to 176 species, 112 genera, and 53 families were obtained and analyzed. The barcoding gap analysis showed that COI gene fragment yielded significant intra- and interspecific divergences and obvious barcoding gaps. NJ phylogenetic trees showed that all species group into monophyletic species clusters whether from the same population or not, except two species (
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.