ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2024
Species Diagnosis and DNA Taxonomy.
Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Integrative taxonomy of cryptic Pachypus chafers using museomics, morphometrics, barcoding, and genomic DNA analysis (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Pachypodinae).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- UITOTO: a software for generating molecular diagnoses for species descriptions.Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society · 2026Article
- An Overview ofInsects · 2024Article
- Hapsolutely: a user-friendly tool integrating haplotype phasing, network construction, and haploweb calculation.Bioinformatics advances · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of DNA has helped to improve and speed up species identification and delimitation. However, it also provides new challenges to taxonomists. Incongruence of outcome from various markers and delimitation methods, bias from sampling and skewed species distribution, implemented models, and the choice of methods/priors may mislead results and also may, in conclusion, increase elements of subjectivity in species taxonomy. The lack of direct diagnostic outcome from most contemporary molecular delimitation approaches and the need for a reference to existing and best sampled trait reference systems reveal the need for refining the criteria of species diagnosis and diagnosability in the current framework of nomenclature codes and good practices to avoid nomenclatorial instability, parallel taxonomies, and consequently more and new taxonomic impediment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38683310What 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.