ArticlePLoS biology2023
Tightening the requirements for species diagnoses would help integrate DNA-based descriptions in taxonomic practice.
Article in PLoS biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- UITOTO: a software for generating molecular diagnoses for species descriptions.Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society · 2026Article
- The Taxonomy of the GenusPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Assessing Species Delimitation inMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Article
- On the Importance of Contrasts in Taxonomic Diagnoses: A Survey of 405 Newly Described Insect Genera.Insects · 2025Review
- DNA barcoding for elasmobranch diversity assessment in Thailand: Its advantages and limitations.PloS one · 2025Article
- Complete Mitochondrial Genome of Clupeonella abrau (Maliatsky, 1930) (Clupeiformes), an Endemic Freshwater Fish from the Lake Abrau (Russia).Doklady biological sciences : proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Biological sciences sections · 2024Article
- The UNITE database for molecular identification and taxonomic communication of fungi and other eukaryotes: sequences, taxa and classifications reconsidered.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern advances in DNA sequencing hold the promise of facilitating descriptions of new organisms at ever finer precision but have come with challenges as the major Codes of bionomenclature contain poorly defined requirements for species and subspecies diagnoses (henceforth, species diagnoses), which is particularly problematic for DNA-based taxonomy. We, the commissioners of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, advocate a tightening of the definition of "species diagnosis" in future editions of Codes of bionomenclature, for example, through the introduction of requirements for specific information on the character states of differentiating traits in comparison with similar species. Such new provisions would enhance taxonomic standards and ensure that all diagnoses, including DNA-based ones, contain adequate taxonomic context. Our recommendations are intended to spur discussion among biologists, as broad community consensus is critical ahead of the implementation of new editions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and other Codes of bionomenclature.
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.