Sentence examples for diagnostic barcoding from inspiring English sources

Diagnostic barcoding loci.

Diagnostic barcoding loci. A. boltoni: ATCT-42-45 & RTTAR-66-70 DiSpecimens Specimens from Ambanitaza differ notably in shape of propodeal spines and length of spines on petiole from those of the type locality.

Diagnostic barcoding loci. A. madagascarensis: A-21, T-423 (shared with one A. goodmani population), T-132 (shared with one A. grandidieri population), T-83, A-84, T-93, T, 138, C-306, T-513, A-595 Specimens examined for Anochetus madagascarensis: Specimens from 326 separate collection events from the following 129 localities were examined.

Diagnostic barcoding loci. A. goodmani: Y-231 (madagascarensis and grandidieri A; boltoni and pattersoni T), W-233 (all others A), RWR-368-370 (others are all ATG), Y-541 (others are all T), R-543 (others are all A), W-546 (others are all T), W-585 (others are all T), M-634 (others are all C).

One particularly comprehensive study of DNA barcodes revealed that 94% of 643 North American bird species possess diagnostic barcode sequences [4], [5].

A more reciprocal relationship between barcoding and taxonomy could be facilitated if BOLD adopted a character-based approach and systematists made an effort to publish diagnostic barcodes alongside traditional morphological characters [83].

Conversely, taxa known to be in need of revision were often comprised of several species that could not be differentiated by barcodes, such as Lobophora (noted in [29]) where 3 of 5 species lacked diagnostic barcodes.

This small proportion of recognized taxa that apparently do not possess diagnostic barcodes, as well the fraction of species potentially housing cryptic species, constitutes the second product — a catalog of taxa that require taxonomic investigation.

Although 98.5% of these species possess diagnostic barcode sequences in Bavaria, records from neighbouring countries suggest that species-level resolution may be compromised in up to 3.5% of cases.

Taxa that have undergone recent taxonomic revision appeared to have a higher proportion of species with diagnostic barcodes e.g. Eupithecia spp. (revised in [47]) – 55 of 55 species formed non-overlapping monophyletic clusters; species of Macariini [48] – 53/54; and Tetracis spp. [28] – 6/6.

This study reports DNA barcodes for more than 1300 Lepidoptera species from the eastern half of North America, establishing that 99.3percentnt of these species possess diagnostic barcode sequences.