ArticleHeliyon2023
Implementation of machine learning in DNA barcoding for determining the plant family taxonomy.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing plant DNA barcoding: integrating chloroplast genome sequencing, cryptic diversity discovery and machine learning.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- DNA sequence contamination analyzer (DNASCAN): a supervised analysis toolkit for detecting and removing DNA contaminants.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The DNA barcoding approach has been used extensively in taxonomy and phylogenetics. The differences in certain DNA sequences are able to differentiate and help classify organisms into taxa. It has been used in cases of taxonomic disputes where morphology by itself is insufficient. This research aimed to utilize hierarchical clustering, an unsupervised machine learning method, to determine and resolve disputes in plant family taxonomy. We take a case study of Leguminosae that historically some classify into three families (Fabaceae, Caesalpiniaceae, and Mimosaceae) but others classify into one family (Leguminosae). This study is divided into several phases, which are: (i) data collection, (ii) data preprocessing, (iii) finding the best distance method, and (iv) determining disputed family. The data used are collected from several sources, including National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), journals, and websites. The data for validation of the methods were collected from NCBI. This was used to determine the best distance method for differentiating families or genera. The data for the case study in the Leguminosae group was collected from journals and a website. From the experiment that we have conducted, we found that the Pearson method is the best distance method to do clustering ITS sequence of plants, both in accuracy and computational cost. We use the Pearson method to determine the disputed family between Leguminosae. We found that the case study of Leguminosae should be grouped into one family based on our research.
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.