Review

Unlocking the genetic code: Exploring the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment

  • Received: 01 June 2023 Revised: 01 August 2023 Accepted: 27 September 2023 Published: 22 November 2023
  • DNA barcoding is a crucial method for assessing and monitoring species diversity amidst escalating threats to global biodiversity. I explore DNA barcoding's potential as a robust and reliable tool for biodiversity assessment. It begins with a comprehensive review of existing literature, delving into the theoretical foundations, methodologies and applications of DNA barcoding. The suitability of various DNA regions, like the COI gene, as universal barcodes are extensively investigated. Additionally, the advantages and limitations of different DNA sequencing technologies and bioinformatics tools are evaluated within the context of DNA barcoding. To evaluate the efficacy of DNA barcoding, diverse ecosystems, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats, are sampled. Extracted DNA from collected specimens undergoes amplification and sequencing of the target barcode region. Comparison of the obtained DNA sequences with reference databases allows for the identification and classification of the sampled organisms. Findings demonstrate that DNA barcoding accurately identifies species, even in cases where morphological identification proves challenging. Moreover, it sheds light on cryptic and endangered species, aiding conservation efforts. I also investigate patterns of genetic diversity and evolutionary relationships among different taxa through the analysis of genetic data. This research contributes to the growing knowledge on DNA barcoding and its applicability for biodiversity assessment. The advantages of this approach, such as speed, accuracy and cost-effectiveness, are highlighted, along with areas for improvement. By unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding enhances our understanding of biodiversity, supports conservation initiatives and informs evidence-based decision-making for the sustainable management of ecosystems.

    Citation: Mohammad Ahmad Ahmad Odah. Unlocking the genetic code: Exploring the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2023, 10(4): 263-294. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2023016

    Related Papers:

    [1] Alicja Florczak, Aleksandra Królikowska, Mateusz Mazurek, Sławomir Woźniak, Zygmunt Domagała . Most relevant genetic factors in ovarian cancer development. AIMS Molecular Science, 2025, 12(1): 1-25. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2025001
    [2] Irene M. Waita, Atunga Nyachieo, Daniel Chai, Samson Muuo, Naomi Maina, Daniel Kariuki, Cleophas M. Kyama . Genetic polymorphisms in eostrogen and progesterone receptor genes in Papio anubis induced with endometriosis during early stage of the disease. AIMS Molecular Science, 2021, 8(1): 86-97. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2021007
    [3] Nikhita Bolar, Aline Verstraeten, Lut Van Laer, Bart Loeys . Molecular insights into bicuspid aortic valve development and the associated aortopathy. AIMS Molecular Science, 2017, 4(4): 478-508. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2017.4.478
    [4] Fatima Al-Hashimi, Salvador J. Diaz-Cano . Multi-target analysis of neoplasms for the evaluation of tumor progression: stochastic approach of biologic processes. AIMS Molecular Science, 2018, 5(1): 14-62. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2018.1.14
    [5] Fumiaki Uchiumi, Akira Sato, Masashi Asai, Sei-ichi Tanuma . An NAD+ dependent/sensitive transcription system: Toward a novel anti-cancer therapy. AIMS Molecular Science, 2020, 7(1): 12-28. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2020002
    [6] Duraimani Shanthi Lakshmi, Sati Bhawna, Ahmed Khan Ghori Junaid, Selvanathan Abinaya, Saikia Katherine, Lote Ishita, Ahluwalia Geetika, Gosar Hetal, Dharmaraj Swetha, Bhatt Dhivya, Kocharekar Akshada, Salat Raunaq, Ramesh Aarthi, AR Balamurali, Ranganathan Rahul . Unlocking weight loss potential: Investigating the impact of personalized nutrigenetic-based diet in an Indian population. AIMS Molecular Science, 2024, 11(1): 21-41. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2024002
    [7] Marco Ruggiero, Stefania Pacini . On the impact of quantum biology and relativistic time dilation in autism. AIMS Molecular Science, 2018, 5(1): 90-95. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2018.1.90
    [8] Ajay Pradhan, Per-Erik Olsson . Regulation of zebrafish gonadal sex differentiation. AIMS Molecular Science, 2016, 3(4): 567-584. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2016.4.567
    [9] Rim Khelifi, Afef Jelloul, Houda Ajmi, Wafa Slimani, Sarra Dimassi, Khouloud Rjiba, Manel Dardour, Moez Gribaa, Ali Saad, Soumaya Mougou-Zerelli . Toward autism spectrum disorders and Williams-Beuren syndrome co-occurrence condition in Tunisian patients: Genetic insights. AIMS Molecular Science, 2024, 11(4): 379-394. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2024023
    [10] Rami S. Habeballa, Mutasim Mohamed Khalafalla Ali, Rashied S. Modawi . Assessment of phylogenetic diversity and relationships among Grewia tenax population in Sudan using RAPD and ISSR molecular markers. AIMS Molecular Science, 2022, 9(1): 1-24. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2022001
  • DNA barcoding is a crucial method for assessing and monitoring species diversity amidst escalating threats to global biodiversity. I explore DNA barcoding's potential as a robust and reliable tool for biodiversity assessment. It begins with a comprehensive review of existing literature, delving into the theoretical foundations, methodologies and applications of DNA barcoding. The suitability of various DNA regions, like the COI gene, as universal barcodes are extensively investigated. Additionally, the advantages and limitations of different DNA sequencing technologies and bioinformatics tools are evaluated within the context of DNA barcoding. To evaluate the efficacy of DNA barcoding, diverse ecosystems, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats, are sampled. Extracted DNA from collected specimens undergoes amplification and sequencing of the target barcode region. Comparison of the obtained DNA sequences with reference databases allows for the identification and classification of the sampled organisms. Findings demonstrate that DNA barcoding accurately identifies species, even in cases where morphological identification proves challenging. Moreover, it sheds light on cryptic and endangered species, aiding conservation efforts. I also investigate patterns of genetic diversity and evolutionary relationships among different taxa through the analysis of genetic data. This research contributes to the growing knowledge on DNA barcoding and its applicability for biodiversity assessment. The advantages of this approach, such as speed, accuracy and cost-effectiveness, are highlighted, along with areas for improvement. By unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding enhances our understanding of biodiversity, supports conservation initiatives and informs evidence-based decision-making for the sustainable management of ecosystems.



    DNA barcoding has emerged as a powerful tool for biodiversity assessment, revolutionizing the field of taxonomy and species identification. By analyzing a short-standardized DNA sequence from a specific gene region, researchers can effectively “barcode” species, allowing for rapid and accurate species identification, even in the absence of observable morphological traits. This technique has proven to be invaluable in various fields, including ecological monitoring, conservation biology and forensic sciences. The concept of DNA barcoding was first proposed by Hebert et al. in 2003 [1] since then, it has gained widespread recognition and adoption within the scientific community. The basic principle behind DNA barcoding is the use of a short and highly conserved gene region, such as the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene, as a molecular identifier. This gene region contains both conserved regions, which provide the necessary primer binding sites for PCR amplification and variable regions, which allow for species-level discrimination. One of the key advantages of DNA barcoding is its ability to overcome the limitations of traditional taxonomic methods, which often rely on morphological characteristics that can be difficult to observe or may not be unique to a particular species. DNA barcoding provides a standardized and objective approach to species identification, enabling researchers to accurately identify organisms at various life stages, including eggs, larvae and fragments, where traditional morphological identification may be challenging [2].

    Moreover, DNA barcoding has proven to be particularly valuable in assessing biodiversity in complex ecosystems, such as tropical rainforests and marine environments, where the sheer number of species and their morphological similarities pose significant challenges to traditional taxonomy. Using DNA barcoding, researchers can rapidly identify and catalog species, providing crucial data for conservation efforts, ecological studies and understanding ecosystem dynamics [3]. In recent years, DNA barcoding has also been applied to other areas, such as food authentication and monitoring of illegal wildlife trade. By analyzing DNA barcodes of food products, researchers can detect species substitutions, fraudulent labeling and the presence of endangered or protected species [4]. This application has important implications for consumer protection, environmental conservation and regulatory enforcement.

    In this review, I aim to explore the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment. I will discuss the advantages and challenges of DNA barcoding, highlight its applications in various fields and present case studies that demonstrate its effectiveness. By shedding light on the current state of DNA barcoding research and its future prospects, I hope to inspire further advancements in this rapidly evolving field.

    My objective of this study is to investigate and evaluate the potential of DNA barcoding as a tool for biodiversity assessment. I also aim to unlock the genetic code of various organisms by utilizing DNA barcoding techniques and analyze its effectiveness in providing accurate and efficient biodiversity information.

    Specifically, I aim to achieve the following objectives:

    I will explore the effectiveness of DNA barcoding in accurately identifying species by analyzing specific regions of the DNA sequence. This objective involves comparing DNA barcode sequences with established taxonomic identification methods to evaluate the reliability and accuracy of DNA barcoding for species identification.

    I will investigate the use of DNA barcoding in estimating species diversity within a given area or ecosystem. By analyzing DNA barcodes from various organisms, the objective is to assess the ability of DNA barcoding to provide comprehensive and reliable data on species richness and abundance.

    My objective is to critically examine the strengths and weaknesses of DNA barcoding as a biodiversity assessment tool. The study will identify potential challenges, such as technical limitations, DNA degradation and sample contamination and analyze their impact on the reliability and applicability of DNA barcoding.

    I will evaluate the practicality and cost-effectiveness of incorporating DNA barcoding into existing biodiversity monitoring programs. This objective includes examining the requirements for laboratory facilities, equipment and expertise, as well as analyzing the potential benefits and challenges of widespread adoption of DNA barcoding in biodiversity assessment.

    My objective is to explore the potential implications of DNA barcoding for conservation and management of biodiversity. The study will assess how DNA barcoding data can contribute to the identification of vulnerable species, tracking invasive species and monitoring the impacts of environmental changes on biodiversity.

    By accomplishing these objectives, I aim to provide valuable insights into the potential of DNA barcoding as a powerful tool for biodiversity assessment. The findings will contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge in the field of biodiversity research and may have implications for conservation efforts and environmental management.

    I aim to explore the potential of DNA barcoding, a molecular technique that utilizes short DNA sequences from standardized gene regions, for assessing biodiversity. I will investigate the effectiveness of DNA barcoding in identifying and distinguishing species based on their unique genetic signatures.

    Comparison with traditional taxonomic approaches: I will compare DNA barcoding with traditional taxonomic methods, such as morphological identification, to evaluate its advantages and limitations. I will examine the accuracy, efficiency and reliability of DNA barcoding in species identification, particularly in cases where morphological identification is challenging or inconclusive.

    Assessing the applicability across different taxa: I will investigate the applicability of DNA barcoding across a broad range of taxonomic groups, including animals, plants, fungi and microorganisms. I will assess the feasibility and reliability of DNA barcoding in different taxa and explore any potential variations in success rates among taxonomic groups.

    Developing and evaluating DNA barcode databases: I will explore existing DNA barcode databases, such as the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and assess their comprehensiveness and usability. It will also discuss the potential for establishing standardized DNA barcode libraries for specific geographic regions or taxonomic groups.

    One limitation of the study is the potential incompleteness of reference DNA barcode databases, which may limit the accuracy and reliability of species identification. This could arise from inadequate representation of certain taxonomic groups or geographic regions, leading to potential misidentifications or ambiguities.

    DNA barcoding may face technical challenges such as DNA degradation, contamination, or amplification biases. These factors can affect the success rate and accuracy of species identification using DNA barcoding. I will acknowledge these limitations and discuss potential strategies to address or mitigate these issues.

    Another limitation is the lack of standardized protocols for DNA barcoding across different laboratories or research groups. This could lead to variations in methodology and data interpretation, potentially affecting the comparability and reproducibility of results. I will highlight these challenges and propose recommendations for standardization.

    DNA barcoding techniques may require specialized laboratory equipment, reagents and trained personnel, which can pose financial and infrastructural challenges, particularly in resource-limited settings. I will discuss these limitations and consider the feasibility and accessibility of DNA barcoding in different contexts.

    I will address ethical considerations related to DNA barcoding, such as the use of genetic information, privacy concerns and potential impacts on local communities or indigenous knowledge systems. It will emphasize the importance of responsible and ethical practices in DNA barcoding research and its applications.

    DNA barcoding is a powerful molecular technique that enables the identification and classification of species based on specific regions of their DNA. This approach utilizes short, standardized DNA sequences known as “barcodes” to distinguish between different species. By comparing these barcode sequences to a comprehensive reference database, researchers can rapidly and accurately identify unknown species, aiding in biodiversity assessment and conservation efforts [1].

    The DNA barcoding technique primarily relies on a specific gene region called the “barcode region”. In animals, the barcode region is typically a segment of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) gene, while for plants, the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions of nuclear ribosomal DNA are commonly used. These barcode regions possess a combination of conserved and variable regions, allowing for species-level identification [5].

    Biodiversity assessment plays a vital role in understanding and conserving the Earth's ecosystems. Traditional taxonomic methods, primarily reliant on morphological characteristics, have been the cornerstone of biodiversity assessment for centuries. However, advancements in molecular biology and the advent of DNA barcoding have revolutionized the field. This historical development elucidates the journey that led to the recognition and exploration of DNA barcoding as a powerful tool for biodiversity assessment [6].

    The concept of using genetic markers for species identification and classification can be traced back to the early 20th century. The groundwork for DNA barcoding was laid when scientists began investigating variations in DNA sequences across different organisms. The discovery of DNA as the genetic material by Miescher in 1871 [7] and the elucidation of the structure of DNA by Watson et al. in 1953 [8] paved the way for further exploration.

    In the 1970s, the development of molecular techniques such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [9] and DNA sequencing [1] revolutionized genetic research. These techniques provided researchers with the tools to amplify and analyze specific regions of DNA, leading to significant advancements in the field of molecular biology. As researchers began to sequence DNA from various organisms, they realized the potential for using genetic information to identify and classify species accurately.

    The term “DNA barcoding” was coined by Canadian scientist Hebert in 2003 [1]. He proposed the use of a short-standardized DNA sequence from a specific gene region as a universal barcode for species identification. The targeted gene region, known as the “barcode”, is highly conserved within species but exhibits enough variation between species to allow for accurate identification. Hebert suggested using a fragment of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) gene as the primary barcode due to its widespread presence in eukaryotic organisms.

    The concept of DNA barcoding gained traction rapidly and researchers from various disciplines began exploring its potential applications. The Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) was established in 2005 [10] to serve as a centralized database for storing and analyzing DNA barcode data. This facilitated collaborations and the sharing of barcode sequences among researchers worldwide. Additionally, numerous studies were conducted to validate the efficacy of DNA barcoding across diverse taxonomic groups, including plants, animals, fungi and microorganisms [11].

    As DNA barcoding gained popularity, researchers realized the importance of refining the barcode selection criteria and expanding the reference barcode database. Various gene regions, in addition to COI, were explored to address challenges posed by certain taxa. The development of high-throughput sequencing technologies further accelerated the DNA barcoding process by enabling the simultaneous analysis of multiple DNA samples. However, challenges such as intraspecific variation, incomplete reference databases and potential cross-species hybridization continue to be areas of active research and refinement.

    The historical development of DNA barcoding showcases a significant paradigm shift in biodiversity assessment, moving from solely morphological identification to incorporating genetic information. The exploration of DNA barcoding as a universal tool for species identification and classification has opened new doors in the field of biodiversity assessment. With its ability to provide rapid and accurate species identification, DNA barcoding has overcome many limitations of traditional taxonomy, such as morphological variations and the presence of cryptic species.

    The establishment of centralized databases like BOLD has facilitated data sharing and collaborations among researchers worldwide, fostering a community-driven approach to DNA barcoding. Ongoing efforts to refine barcode selection criteria and expand reference databases are ensuring the robustness and reliability of this approach across diverse taxonomic groups. Additionally, advancements in high-throughput sequencing technologies have revolutionized the DNA barcoding process, enabling efficient analysis of large numbers of samples and increasing its scalability.

    Looking ahead, the integration of DNA barcoding with other molecular techniques, such as meta-barcoding and environmental DNA analysis, holds great promise for unraveling complex ecological interactions and understanding ecosystem dynamics. The combination of these approaches can provide a comprehensive picture of biodiversity, including the identification of species present in environmental samples and monitoring changes in community composition over time.

    To facilitate species identification, a comprehensive reference database of DNA barcodes is essential. This database contains known barcode sequences linked to verified species identifications. Large-scale initiatives such as the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and the International Barcode of Life Project (iBOL) have been instrumental in creating and maintaining these databases, incorporating DNA barcode data from diverse taxa [7].

    The DNA barcoding workflow involves several key steps. First, a DNA sample is obtained from the organism of interest, often through non-invasive methods such as tissue sampling or by extracting DNA from environmental samples. Next, the barcode region is amplified using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques, followed by DNA sequencing using high-throughput sequencing technologies [9].

    After obtaining the DNA sequences, they are compared to the reference database using bioinformatics tools and algorithms. Sequence alignment and similarity searches are performed to determine the closest matches to the query sequence. Statistical methods, such as neighbor-joining or maximum likelihood algorithms, are then employed to construct phylogenetic trees or distance matrices, aiding in species identification [9].

    DNA barcoding has a wide range of applications in biodiversity assessment and conservation. It enables rapid species identification, even for cryptic or morphologically similar species, which can be challenging using traditional taxonomy. DNA barcoding has been used in various fields, including species discovery, ecological monitoring, forensic identification and assessing the impacts of habitat loss and climate change on biodiversity [10],[11].

    DNA barcoding is a methodological approach that utilizes a standardized DNA sequence as a unique identifier for species identification and classification. It involves comparing the DNA barcode of an unknown specimen with a reference database of DNA barcodes from known species to determine its taxonomic affiliation accurately. The barcode serves as a molecular signature that is both specific to the species and highly conserved within individuals of the same species [1].

    DNA barcoding is a powerful technique used in biodiversity assessment and species identification. It is based on analyzing specific regions of an organism's DNA that exhibit distinct variations among different species. The principles of DNA barcoding involve the selection of a universal genetic marker, DNA extraction and amplification, DNA sequencing and analysis and the utilization of reference barcode databases.

    The foundation of DNA barcoding lies in choosing a specific DNA region that meets certain criteria. This region should have two essential characteristics: Sufficient interspecific variation and high intraspecific conservation. Interspecific variation refers to differences in the DNA sequence among different species, while intraspecific conservation denotes the similarity of DNA sequences within individuals of the same species. The selected DNA barcode region should allow for reliable species-level discrimination.

    In animals, the most commonly used DNA barcode region is a 648-base pair segment of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. For plants, the chloroplast gene rbcL or the nuclear internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region is often employed. These regions have been found to be effective in providing the necessary variation and conservation to distinguish between species accurately.

    The first step in DNA barcoding involves obtaining the genetic material (DNA) from the target organism. This process is carried out using established laboratory protocols for DNA extraction. Once the DNA is isolated, the target DNA barcode region is selectively amplified through a technique called polymerase chain reaction (PCR). PCR ensures that there is a sufficient amount of the DNA barcode region available for subsequent sequencing and analysis [9],[12].

    Following PCR amplification, the DNA barcode region is subjected to DNA sequencing using high-throughput methods. Modern technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, have significantly improved the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of generating DNA barcode data. The resulting DNA sequences are then compared to a reference barcode library or database, which contains sequences from known species [9],[10],[12].

    To analyze and interpret the sequencing data, bioinformatic tools and algorithms are employed. These tools aid in identifying species and classifying them based on their DNA barcode sequences. The comparison with the reference database allows researchers to determine the species to which the DNA belongs accurately [1].

    The success and accuracy of DNA barcoding heavily rely on the availability and quality of reference barcode databases. These databases store DNA barcode sequences and associated metadata, such as taxonomic information and geographic origin, for known species. When new DNA barcode sequences are obtained from unidentified organisms, they are matched against the sequences in these databases to identify the species [10].

    Popular reference barcode databases include the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) GenBank, as a part of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration. These databases play a crucial role in validating the identification of species based on DNA barcodes and contribute to the overall reliability of DNA barcoding as a method for species identification [10].

    DNA barcoding offers a promising approach to assess biodiversity rapidly and accurately. By utilizing the unique genetic information encoded in DNA barcodes, researchers can effectively study and understand the vast diversity of organisms present on Earth. This standardized method for species identification has wide-ranging applications in various fields, including ecology, conservation biology, forensic sciences and the monitoring of invasive species [1].

    Advantages of DNA barcoding: are shown in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Advantages of DNA Barcoding.
    Advantages Description References
    Species Identification Enables rapid and accurate identification of species, especially useful for difficult-to-identify species. [1]
    Standardization Uses a standardized genetic marker (e.g., COI gene) for species identification, allowing global data sharing. [13]
    Discovery of Cryptic Species Helps uncover genetically distinct species with similar morphology, contributing to biodiversity understanding. [14]
    Assessing Species Diversity Provides a powerful tool for estimating species richness and abundance in ecosystems for conservation and research. [6]

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    The expansion of public DNA barcode databases, such as the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration (INSDC), is necessary to include a broader representation of species from diverse ecosystems [15]. Additionally, targeted sampling efforts should focus on taxonomically challenging groups and regions with high biodiversity, ensuring comprehensive coverage across taxonomic groups and geographic locations.

    Addressing intraspecific variability requires the exploration and incorporation of additional genetic markers or the use of supplementary approaches. Incorporating nuclear markers alongside the mitochondrial COI gene can provide a more comprehensive understanding of genetic diversity within species [16]. Advancements in high-throughput sequencing technologies and the development of analytical tools specifically designed for intraspecific analyses can help mitigate the challenges associated with intraspecific variability.

    To overcome technical limitations, there is a need for the development of streamlined protocols and cost-effective DNA barcoding workflows. Simplifying laboratory procedures, optimizing DNA extraction methods and reducing sequencing costs are ongoing areas of research. The integration of portable DNA sequencers and miniaturized laboratory equipment may further enhance the accessibility and feasibility of DNA barcoding, especially in remote or resource-limited environments [17]. Hybridization and introgression pose challenges to DNA barcoding, particularly when identifying species with recent or ongoing gene flow. Integrating multiple lines of evidence, such as morphology, ecology and genomic data, can help resolve complex cases. Advancements in genomic techniques, such as genotyping-by-sequencing and whole-genome sequencing, can provide a more comprehensive understanding of hybridization events and their implications for species identification [18],[1].

    Uncovering hidden biodiversity through DNA analysis: case study and conservation applications. By analyzing the DNA sequences of various organisms, researchers were able to uncover previously unknown species and gain insights into the overall biodiversity of the region. This approach proved valuable in revealing the hidden diversity within the ecosystem and provided a foundation for further conservation efforts [2],[19], as shown in Table 2.

    Table 2.  Case studies and applications.
    Case Study Description References
    Assessing Species Richness By analyzing DNA sequences of various organisms, researchers uncover previously unknown species and gain insights into overall biodiversity in a tropical rainforest. [20],[21]
    Monitoring Endangered Species and Illegal Wildlife Trade DNA barcoding used to identify the origin of confiscated wildlife products, combat illegal wildlife trade and implement targeted conservation measures. [22],[23]
    Streamlining Quarantine and Biosecurity Measures DNA barcoding helps rapidly identify potential invasive species at national borders to prevent the entry of harmful organisms and protect local biodiversity. [24],[25]
    Evaluating Pollinator Diversity and Plant-Pollinator Interactions DNA barcoding revolutionizes the study of pollinator diversity by analyzing pollen grains on insects to assess pollinator assemblages and ecological roles. [26],[27]
    Assessing Food Safety and Authenticity DNA barcoding applied to ensure food safety by detecting species substitution, mislabeling and adulteration, particularly in seafood products. [28],[29]

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Biodiversity assessment plays a crucial role in understanding and preserving the complexity and richness of ecosystems. It enables scientists to gain insights into the variety of species present, their distribution patterns and the ecological interactions that shape a specific ecosystem. This overview aims to explore the methods and techniques used for biodiversity assessment in a specific ecosystem, highlighting the potential of DNA barcoding as a valuable tool for unlocking the genetic code and enhancing our understanding of biodiversity.

    Biodiversity assessment methods were shown in Table 3.

    Table 3.  Biodiversity assessment methods.
    Method Description Advantages Disadvantages
    Traditional Taxonomy and Species Inventory Identification and classification of species based on morphological characteristics. ✓ Provides a foundation for understanding biodiversity.
    ✓ Offers insights into the physical characteristics of species.
    ✓ Time-consuming and labor-intensive.
    ✓ Requires specialized taxonomic expertise.
    Ecological Surveys Comprehensive field observations and data collection to assess species distribution and abundance. ✓ Provides data on species diversity, population dynamics and habitat preferences.
    ✓ Utilizes various sampling techniques for accurate assessments.
    ✓ Requires significant fieldwork and resources.
    ✓ May not capture elusive or hard-to-reach species effectively.
    DNA Barcoding Uses short DNA sequences from a standardized genomic region to identify species. ✓ Rapid and accurate identification of species.
    ✓ Useful for differentiating cryptic species or life stages.
    ✓ Requires DNA sequencing facilities and expertise.
    ✓ May not work well for species with poorly characterized DNA barcodes.
    Metagenomics Analyzes environmental DNA (eDNA) to assess biodiversity without traditional sampling. ✓ Allows the identification of diverse organisms, including microbes and elusive species.
    ✓ Reduces the need for direct specimen collection.
    ✓ Dependent on the availability of eDNA in the environment.
    ✓ Limited by current knowledge of reference genomes for identification. - Does not provide detailed individual-level data.
    Citizen Science Engages the public in data collection and biodiversity assessment through various platforms and apps. ✓ Increases geographic coverage and data volume.
    ✓ Involves the public in conservation efforts.
    ✓ Quality and accuracy of data may vary due to non-experts collecting information.
    ✓ May not capture rare or hard-to-spot species adequately.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Biodiversity assessment in a specific ecosystem is crucial for conservation efforts and understanding the intricate dynamics of life on Earth. Traditional taxonomy, ecological surveys, DNA barcoding, metagenomics and citizen science are all valuable methods that contribute to our understanding of biodiversity. Among these methods, DNA barcoding offers a promising avenue for unlocking the genetic code of organisms, enhancing species identification and providing valuable data for conservation planning and management. Continued research and innovation in biodiversity assessment techniques will contribute to the sustainable management and preservation of our natural ecosystems [1], [30][33].

    The rapid loss of biodiversity worldwide has underscored the need for efficient and accurate species identification and discovery methods. Traditional approaches based on morphological characteristics can be time-consuming, subjective and challenging, particularly when dealing with cryptic species or life stages that lack distinctive features. In recent years, DNA barcoding has emerged as a promising tool for addressing these limitations by leveraging the genetic information encoded in an organism's DNA to identify and discover species. This overview explores the application of DNA barcoding in the context of species identification and discovery, focusing on its potential, challenges and recent advancements.

    DNA barcoding involves the use of short, standardized gene regions as molecular markers to distinguish between different species [34]. The most widely utilized DNA barcode region is the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene, which exhibits both conserved regions for primer binding and variable regions that allow for species differentiation. By comparing the DNA barcode sequence obtained from an unknown specimen to a comprehensive reference library, species identification can be achieved accurately and rapidly [1]. This approach has been successfully applied across various taxonomic groups, including plants, animals, fungi and protists.

    In addition to its identification capabilities, DNA barcoding has proven to be a valuable tool for species discovery. By analyzing DNA sequences from unknown specimens, researchers can identify instances where the obtained sequence does not match any known species, potentially indicating the presence of a new, undescribed species. This has been particularly beneficial in understudied or biodiversity-rich regions, where traditional methods might overlook cryptic or previously unknown species [18]. By combining DNA barcoding with integrative taxonomic approaches, such as morphological analysis and ecological data, researchers can provide comprehensive evidence for the existence of new species and contribute to our understanding of biodiversity.

    DNA barcoding has witnessed significant advancements since its inception, primarily driven by improvements in sequencing technologies and the establishment of extensive reference databases. High-throughput sequencing platforms, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), have enhanced the speed and efficiency of DNA barcoding, allowing for the simultaneous analysis of multiple specimens [24]. Moreover, the expansion of reference libraries, such as the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and GenBank, has increased the accuracy and reliability of species identification and discovery [35].

    However, challenges remain in the application of DNA barcoding. Taxonomic limitations, such as incomplete reference databases or taxonomic uncertainties, can hinder accurate species identification [36]. Additionally, DNA barcoding may encounter difficulties in identifying certain taxa due to hybridization, introgression, or incomplete lineage sorting. Furthermore, there is a need to establish standardized protocols for DNA extraction, amplification and sequencing to ensure comparability and reproducibility across studies.

    Conservation and monitoring efforts play a vital role in preserving biodiversity and understanding the status of different species and ecosystems. Traditional methods of biodiversity assessment often rely on morphological identification, which can be time-consuming, require specialized taxonomic expertise and may not be applicable to certain life stages or species with cryptic traits. However, recent advancements in DNA barcoding have revolutionized biodiversity assessment by enabling rapid and accurate species identification through the analysis of short DNA sequences. This overview explores the application of DNA barcoding in conservation and monitoring efforts, highlighting its potential to enhance our understanding of biodiversity, as shown in Figure 1.

    Figure 1.  Conservation and monitoring efforts.

    DNA barcoding provides a powerful tool for species identification and taxonomy. By comparing DNA barcode sequences obtained from unknown specimens to a reference database of known sequences, researchers can accurately determine the species identity of an organism [37]. This approach is particularly valuable in cases where morphological identification is challenging or impossible, such as when dealing with specimens in different life stages or degraded samples [1]. DNA barcoding not only enables the identification of known species but also facilitates the discovery of cryptic species and the revision of taxonomic classifications, thereby enhancing our understanding of biodiversity.

    Conservation efforts rely on accurate assessments of biodiversity patterns at different scales. DNA barcoding can provide valuable insights into the distribution and abundance of species within ecosystems. By analyzing DNA barcode data from various organisms, researchers can identify hotspots of biodiversity, detect changes in species composition over time and assess the impact of human activities on ecosystems [24]. This information is crucial for designing effective conservation strategies and monitoring the success of conservation initiatives.

    DNA barcoding plays a vital role in the identification and tracking of endangered species and invasive species. By developing a comprehensive DNA barcode library for endangered species, conservationists can identify and differentiate individuals, monitor population dynamics and implement targeted conservation measures [38]. Similarly, DNA barcoding can aid in the detection and management of invasive species by enabling early identification and accurate tracking of their spread [39]. This knowledge allows for the development of rapid response strategies to mitigate the negative impacts of invasive species on native biodiversity.

    Environmental DNA (eDNA) and Monitoring: Environmental DNA (eDNA) refers to the genetic material shed by organisms into their surrounding environment. eDNA analysis, coupled with DNA barcoding techniques, enables non-invasive monitoring of species presence and abundance in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems [40]. By collecting and analyzing water, soil, or air samples, researchers can detect the presence of specific species, even those that are elusive or difficult to observe directly. This approach enhances our ability to monitor and assess biodiversity in challenging environments and can inform conservation decision-making.

    Conservation and monitoring efforts are crucial for preserving biodiversity and guiding effective management strategies. DNA barcoding has emerged as a powerful tool to enhance these efforts, offering rapid and accurate species identification, assessing biodiversity patterns, tracking endangered and invasive species and enabling non-invasive monitoring through eDNA analysis. By unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding contributes to a deeper understanding of biodiversity and empowers conservationists to make informed decisions to protect our natural heritage.

    Forensic applications of DNA barcoding offer significant potential for enhancing biodiversity assessment and aiding in the identification and monitoring of species. DNA barcoding is a technique that involves sequencing a short, standardized region of DNA to identify and differentiate species. This powerful tool has been widely employed in various fields, including forensic sciences, to address questions related to species identification, wildlife trafficking, ecological monitoring and conservation efforts, as shown in Figure 2.

    Figure 2.  Forensic applications of DNA barcoding.

    Forensic DNA barcoding plays a crucial role in species identification, particularly in cases where traditional morphological methods fail or are inconclusive. By analyzing the unique DNA barcode sequences of different species, forensic scientists can accurately identify samples of unknown origin, such as confiscated animal products or fragmented remains. This can aid in criminal investigations involving illegal wildlife trade, poaching, or the identification of endangered species in forensic contexts [41].

    Illegal wildlife trafficking is a pressing global issue and DNA barcoding offers an effective means to combat this illicit trade. By barcoding confiscated samples, such as skins, bones, or products derived from endangered species, authorities can determine the species involved and track their geographic origin. This information can be vital in prosecuting traffickers and dismantling criminal networks involved in wildlife smuggling [1].

    Forensic entomology, the study of insects in legal investigations, benefits from DNA barcoding for accurate species identification. In cases of human or animal remains, insects found at the crime scene can provide critical information about the time and location of death. DNA barcoding enables entomologists to identify the species of these insects, helping to establish the postmortem interval and assisting in criminal investigations [42].

    DNA barcoding has immense potential for ecological monitoring and conservation efforts. By sampling environmental DNA (eDNA) from various habitats, researchers can detect and monitor the presence of species without the need for direct observation. This non-invasive approach can provide valuable data on biodiversity, invasive species and ecosystem health. Additionally, DNA barcoding can aid in tracking the spread of pathogens or monitoring the success of restoration efforts [43].

    Forensic applications of DNA barcoding provide powerful tools for biodiversity assessment and conservation efforts. The ability to accurately identify species and track their origin has profound implications for combating wildlife trafficking, assisting in criminal investigations and monitoring ecological changes. DNA barcoding offers a reliable and efficient approach to unlocking the genetic code, providing researchers with valuable insights into the world's biodiversity.

    By analyzing barcode sequences, researchers can uncover hidden biodiversity, refine species boundaries and gain insights into evolutionary relationships. This information is critical for conservation efforts, as accurately defining species boundaries is essential for effective management and conservation strategies. The analysis of DNA barcode sequences also allows for the exploration of ecological patterns and processes. By studying the genetic diversity within and between populations, researchers can assess the genetic structure of species, understand their dispersal patterns and uncover factors influencing population dynamics. Additionally, DNA barcoding can shed light on community composition, species interactions and ecosystem functioning, providing valuable information for ecological studies and conservation planning [1],[44].

    To support DNA barcode sequence analysis, comprehensive reference databases are crucial. These databases contain a vast collection of validated barcode sequences linked to accurately identified species. They serve as a reference for species identification and facilitate the discovery of new species. Notable examples include the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) and the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration (INSDC), which house extensive collections of DNA barcode sequences from various taxonomic groups [1].

    Biodiversity assessment plays a crucial role in understanding and conserving the rich array of species inhabiting our planet. Traditional taxonomy, which relies on morphological characteristics, has long been the cornerstone of species identification and classification. However, with advancements in molecular biology, DNA barcoding has emerged as a promising tool for biodiversity assessment. This overview aims to compare DNA barcoding with traditional taxonomy, highlighting the potential and limitations of each approach [1],[6].

    By comparing DNA sequences from different specimens, researchers can identify distinct genetic clusters that may represent new species yet to be formally described [24]. This aspect of DNA barcoding contributes to our understanding of the true extent of global biodiversity and aids in documenting and conserving previously unrecognized species.

    Despite its potential, DNA barcoding also has some limitations. It heavily relies on the availability and quality of reference databases, which may be incomplete or biased towards certain taxonomic groups [6]. This issue can result in misidentification or the inability to assign a species name to a given sequence. Additionally, DNA barcoding is less effective for organisms with highly conserved or rapidly evolving genes, as these regions may not provide enough variation to differentiate species accurately.

    Traditional taxonomy, on the other hand, has a long history and expertise in species identification. It takes into account various morphological features, such as shape, size, coloration and anatomical characteristics, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of an organism's phenotype. Traditional taxonomy also considers ecological and behavioral aspects, which are often not captured by DNA barcoding alone.

    Exploring the role of DNA barcoding in assessing biodiversity patterns, highlighting its potential in unlocking the genetic code and revolutionizing our understanding of the natural world, as shown in Figure 3.

    Figure 3.  Assessment of biodiversity patterns.

    DNA barcoding involves the amplification and sequencing of a standardized region of DNA, typically the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) gene. This short DNA sequence acts as a “barcode” unique to each species. By comparing these barcodes with existing reference databases, researchers can quickly and accurately identify species, even in cases where traditional morphological identification is challenging. DNA barcoding expedites the process of species discovery, allowing for the identification of new or cryptic species [45].

    DNA barcoding facilitates the monitoring of biodiversity patterns over time. By comparing DNA barcodes obtained from environmental samples, such as soil, water, or air, researchers can assess the presence and abundance of various species within an ecosystem. This non-invasive approach enables the detection of rare, elusive, or endangered species, contributing to effective conservation strategies. Moreover, DNA barcoding enables the identification of invasive species and the assessment of their impact on native biodiversity [1].

    DNA barcoding provides valuable insights into the evolutionary relationships among species. By comparing DNA barcodes across different taxa, researchers can reconstruct phylogenetic trees and elucidate the evolutionary history of organisms. This information aids in understanding the patterns of speciation, biogeography and ecological interactions. DNA barcoding also helps resolve taxonomic uncertainties, allowing for more accurate classification and identification of species [27].

    DNA barcoding has proven useful in forensic investigations related to biodiversity assessment. By analyzing DNA barcodes, it is possible to identify species involved in illegal wildlife trade, monitor the origin of biological samples and detect the presence of protected species in products or materials. These applications have significant implications for law enforcement efforts, conservation strategies and the protection of biodiversity [46].

    DNA barcoding enhances our ability to assess and monitor biodiversity, providing crucial information for conservation and management initiatives. By accurately identifying species and understanding their distribution patterns, conservationists can make informed decisions regarding habitat protection, species reintroduction and the establishment of protected areas. DNA barcoding contributes to the conservation of biodiversity by providing a standardized and efficient approach to assess and monitor species richness and distribution [47].

    Cryptic species, often indistinguishable by traditional morphological characteristics, pose a significant challenge to taxonomists and biodiversity researchers. However, advances in DNA barcoding techniques have revolutionized the field of species identification by offering a powerful tool to uncover hidden diversity within ecosystems. This overview highlights the role of DNA barcoding in the identification of cryptic species, showcasing its potential for accurate and efficient biodiversity assessment [2].

    Cryptic species refer to distinct biological entities that are morphologically similar or identical, making their differentiation based on traditional taxonomy difficult. These species often exhibit significant genetic divergence and can only be reliably identified using molecular approaches.

    DNA barcoding utilizes short standardized DNA sequences to differentiate species based on genetic variation. The mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) gene has emerged as the primary marker for DNA barcoding due to its conserved regions for primer binding and its variability across species. By comparing the COI sequences of unknown specimens to a reference library of known barcodes, cryptic species can be revealed.

    Advantages of DNA barcoding in identifying cryptic species: are shown in Figure 4.

    Figure 4.  Advantages of DNA barcoding in identifying cryptic species.

    DNA barcoding allows for fine-scale discrimination between closely related species, overcoming the limitations of morphological identification. By examining the genetic variation, even subtle differences between cryptic species can be detected, aiding in accurate species identification.

    DNA barcoding offers a rapid and cost-effective method for large-scale biodiversity assessments. High-throughput sequencing technologies and automation enable the processing of numerous samples simultaneously, making it feasible to assess biodiversity in a timely manner.

    DNA barcoding has facilitated the discovery of previously unknown species, highlighting the presence of hidden or overlooked diversity within ecosystems. By uncovering cryptic species, researchers gain valuable insights into the true extent of biodiversity and its ecological significance.

    DNA barcoding has proven invaluable in forensic investigations, aiding in the identification of illegally traded or endangered species. By analyzing DNA barcodes of confiscated specimens, authorities can enforce wildlife protection regulations and combat illegal wildlife trade effectively.

    While DNA barcoding has demonstrated great potential in identifying cryptic species, several challenges remain. These include the development of robust reference libraries, resolving cases of incomplete lineage sorting and addressing the influence of hybridization and introgression. Furthermore, ongoing advancements in DNA sequencing technologies and the incorporation of multi-locus barcoding approaches hold promise for enhancing the accuracy and reliability of cryptic species identification [1].

    Exploring the various ways in which DNA barcoding contributes to conservation efforts and aids in effective biodiversity management, as shown in Figure 5.

    Figure 5.  Implications for conservation and management.

    DNA barcoding enables quick and reliable species identification, even for morphologically similar or cryptic species [24]. Traditional methods of species identification often rely on subjective morphological characteristics, which can be challenging and time-consuming. By using DNA barcoding, researchers can accurately identify species, allowing for improved monitoring of biodiversity across ecosystems [1]. This information is crucial for conservationists to track population trends, detect invasive species and assess the effectiveness of conservation measures.

    DNA barcoding facilitates the study of genetic diversity within and among populations, providing insights into evolutionary relationships and population dynamics. By analyzing variations in DNA barcodes, researchers can identify genetically distinct populations, understand dispersal patterns and assess gene flow [24]. Such information is vital for prioritizing conservation efforts, identifying populations at risk and designing effective conservation strategies [48].

    DNA barcoding has proven invaluable in combating illegal wildlife trade, wildlife trafficking and the identification of endangered species products [49]. By analyzing DNA barcodes of confiscated samples, authorities can determine the species origin, identify poached individuals and enforce regulations. This application plays a critical role in conserving threatened species by deterring illegal activities and supporting the implementation of relevant policies.

    DNA barcoding enables comprehensive assessment and monitoring of ecosystem health and functioning [50]. By studying DNA barcodes extracted from environmental samples (eDNA), researchers can identify the presence of various organisms, including those that are difficult to observe directly. This non-invasive approach allows for a more accurate assessment of biodiversity and ecosystem responses to environmental changes [51].

    DNA barcoding data can inform conservation prioritization by identifying areas of high species richness and endemism [52]. By understanding the biodiversity hotspots and identifying species with unique genetic traits, conservationists can allocate resources effectively and develop targeted conservation strategies. This approach optimizes conservation efforts by focusing on areas and species that are most vulnerable and ecologically significant.

    By understanding and addressing these issues, researchers can enhance the effectiveness and applicability of DNA barcoding in biodiversity assessment.

    DNA barcoding relies on the amplification and sequencing of a specific genetic marker, typically the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. However, some taxa exhibit low levels of genetic variation in the COI region, making species discrimination challenging. Additionally, the existing reference barcode library is often biased towards well-studied groups, resulting in limited taxonomic coverage. Overcoming these limitations requires the inclusion of additional markers and the expansion of reference databases [1],[53].

    Cryptic species, which are morphologically similar but genetically distinct, pose a significant challenge to DNA barcoding. In such cases, a single barcode sequence may represent multiple species, leading to misidentification. Additionally, hybridization events can complicate species identification by introducing mixed or atypical barcode sequences. Overcoming these challenges necessitates the use of complementary approaches, such as integrative taxonomy and genomic methods, to improve species delimitation [54],[55].

    DNA barcoding is often applied to degraded DNA samples, such as those extracted from museum specimens or environmental samples. The quality and quantity of DNA in such samples can be limited, affecting the success of amplification and sequencing. To overcome this, researchers should explore alternative markers that are more resilient to degradation and optimize protocols for handling challenging samples [56],[57].

    DNA barcoding traditionally focuses on species-level identification, but understanding intraspecific genetic variation and population structure is crucial for biodiversity assessments. Incorporating population-level analysis and expanding the barcode reference library to include multiple individuals per species will enhance the resolution of DNA barcoding and enable finer-scale studies [58],[59].

    The increasing volume of DNA barcoding data poses challenges in terms of data analysis and interpretation. Developing robust bioinformatics tools and workflows that can handle large datasets and facilitate data integration with other sources of information will be critical. Moreover, the establishment of standardized protocols and guidelines for data quality control and validation is essential to ensure the reliability and comparability of results [51],[60],[61].

    To overcome the limitations discussed, future research in DNA barcoding should focus on the following aspects:

    Incorporate additional genetic markers to enhance species discrimination and overcome limitations associated with single-gene barcoding [7],[62].

    Utilize high-throughput sequencing technologies to generate large-scale DNA barcode datasets efficiently and cost-effectively [8],[63].

    Combine DNA barcoding with other sources of data, such as morphology, ecology and environmental parameters, to improve species identification and ecological interpretation [64].

    Engage citizen scientists in data collection and analysis to increase the coverage and depth of DNA barcode databases [65].

    One significant challenge in DNA barcoding lies in the accurate identification and classification of species. The process of assigning a barcode sequence to a specific taxonomic entity relies heavily on comprehensive and reliable reference databases. However, incomplete reference databases, taxonomic uncertainties, cryptic species complexes and insufficient representation of certain taxonomic groups can hinder accurate species identification [44],[66]. Overcoming these challenges necessitates collaborative efforts among taxonomists, geneticists and ecologists to improve reference databases and resolve taxonomic uncertainties.

    Obtaining high-quality DNA from various specimen types can be challenging. Different organisms have different preservation requirements and DNA degradation can occur due to factors such as improper storage conditions specimen age and contamination [2]. Developing standardized protocols for DNA extraction preservation and storage, particularly for diverse or delicate specimens, is crucial to ensure accurate and reliable results.

    PCR amplification of the DNA barcode region is a crucial step in DNA barcoding workflows. However, PCR amplification can be prone to biases, such as preferential amplification of certain taxonomic groups or difficulties in amplifying GC-rich regions [67]. Primer selection is a critical factor that influences the success of amplification and the choice of primers should be carefully evaluated to minimize biases and maximize coverage across diverse taxa [68].

    DNA sequencing technologies have greatly advanced, but errors can still occur during the sequencing process, leading to erroneous base calls or chimeric sequences [69]. Quality control measures, including sequence trimming, removal of low-quality reads and detection of potential errors, are essential for ensuring reliable DNA barcode data. Moreover, analyzing large volumes of DNA barcode data requires bioinformatics expertise and efficient computational tools for sequence alignment, clustering and species identification [68].

    Harmonizing DNA barcoding with traditional taxonomic approaches is crucial for comprehensive biodiversity assessments. Integrating molecular data with morphological examination and expert taxonomic knowledge helps validate species identifications and address taxonomic uncertainties. This interdisciplinary collaboration can enhance the reliability and accuracy of DNA barcoding results [70].

    Despite the challenges associated with DNA barcoding, ongoing research and technological advancements continue to address these hurdles and unlock the vast potential of this molecular tool for biodiversity assessment. Collaborative efforts, standardization of protocols, improvements in reference databases and the integration of molecular and traditional taxonomic approaches are key steps towards maximizing the utility of DNA barcoding in various fields, including conservation biology, ecological studies and forensic sciences. By understanding these challenges, researchers can refine methodologies and develop innovative solutions to unlock the full potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment.

    Several potential solutions and advancements that can further optimize DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment, as shown in Figure 6.

    Figure 6.  Potential solutions and improvements.

    One key aspect for successful DNA barcoding is the availability of a comprehensive and reliable reference library. Building and expanding this library will enable accurate species identification across different taxonomic groups. Efforts should be made to sequence and include representative species from diverse geographical regions and habitats. Collaboration between research institutions, museums and taxonomic experts is essential to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the reference database [71].

    The COI gene, although widely used, may not always be suitable for certain taxa due to issues such as amplification failure or low sequence divergence. Developing mini-barcodes, shorter DNA regions that exhibit higher levels of variation within a particular taxonomic group, can overcome these limitations. Additionally, exploring alternative genetic markers, such as nuclear genes or mitochondrial genes other than COI, may improve the resolution and accuracy of DNA barcoding [1].

    Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have revolutionized genomic research and can greatly enhance DNA barcoding. High-throughput sequencing platforms, such as Illumina and Pacific Biosciences, enable the simultaneous analysis of multiple samples and offer deeper coverage, thus improving sequencing accuracy and efficiency. By implementing NGS technologies, it becomes possible to obtain barcode data for large-scale biodiversity surveys [72].

    DNA barcoding can encounter difficulties when dealing with taxonomically challenging groups, such as cryptic species complexes or recently diverged lineages. Accurate species identification relies on robust taxonomy and efforts should be made to resolve taxonomic uncertainties and update species concepts. Collaboration between molecular biologists and taxonomists is crucial to overcome taxonomic and nomenclatural challenges and refine the DNA barcode reference library [73].

    Metabarcoding, a technique that combines DNA barcoding with high-throughput sequencing, offers promising opportunities for assessing biodiversity using environmental DNA (eDNA) samples. By amplifying and sequencing DNA present in environmental samples (e.g., soil, water), metabarcoding allows for the detection of various organisms without the need for direct observation. This approach is particularly useful for studying complex ecological communities and monitoring endangered or elusive species [74].

    The integration of DNA barcoding with other molecular techniques offers several advantages, including increased resolution, phylogenetic inference and the ability to study complex ecological interactions, as shown in Figure 7.

    Figure 7.  Integration with other molecular techniques.

    Metabarcoding combines DNA barcoding with high-throughput sequencing technologies to analyze multiple DNA samples simultaneously. By targeting multiple genetic markers, such as COI, rRNA genes, or specific functional genes, metabarcoding allows for the identification of species present in environmental samples, such as soil, water or gut contents. This technique provides insights into community composition, ecological interactions and ecosystem functioning [68].

    Integrating DNA barcoding with transcriptomics enables the study of gene expression patterns in different species. This approach involves the sequencing and analysis of the transcriptome, the complete set of RNA molecules expressed by an organism. By combining DNA barcoding with transcriptomics, researchers can investigate the functional genomics of diverse organisms, including gene expression profiles, molecular adaptation and responses to environmental stressors [1].

    DNA barcoding can be integrated with genomics to explore genetic diversity, population structure and evolutionary relationships. Whole-genome sequencing allows for the characterization of the entire genome of an organism, providing detailed information about genetic variations, gene flow and speciation processes. By combining DNA barcoding with genomics, researchers can investigate patterns of genetic divergence, hybridization and adaptive evolution in species of interest [75].

    Metagenomics integrates DNA barcoding with shotgun sequencing to analyze the genomic content of environmental samples. This approach enables the identification and functional characterization of microbial communities, including bacteria, archaea and viruses, without the need for culturing. By combining DNA barcoding with metagenomics, researchers can explore the microbial diversity and functional potential of various habitats, such as soils, oceans and the human gut [76],[77].

    Integration of DNA barcoding with proteomics and metabolomics allows for a comprehensive understanding of an organism's phenotype and metabolic activities. Proteomics involves the study of proteins expressed by an organism, while metabolomics focuses on the analysis of small molecules involved in metabolic processes. By combining DNA barcoding with these techniques, researchers can elucidate the relationships between genotype, phenotype and the environment [78][79].

    The integration of DNA barcoding with other molecular techniques offers tremendous potential for advancing biodiversity assessment. By combining the strengths of different approaches, researchers can obtain a more holistic understanding of species identification, community dynamics, functional genomics and ecological interactions. These integrative approaches provide powerful tools for conservation biology, ecosystem monitoring and understanding the impact of environmental change on biodiversity [24],[80].

    The journey from the conceptualization of DNA barcoding by Paul Hebert to its current applications demonstrates a paradigm shift in the field of taxonomy and species identification. The study underscores the advantages of DNA barcoding, such as rapid and accurate species identification, standardization, and the discovery of cryptic species, while acknowledging the challenges and ongoing refinements in the methodology. The findings of the research affirm the efficacy of DNA barcoding in diverse ecosystems, shedding light on species even when morphological identification is challenging. The ability of DNA barcoding to reveal genetic diversity, evolutionary relationships, and support conservation efforts emphasizes its significance in the face of escalating threats to global biodiversity. The establishment and expansion of reference databases like BOLD, coupled with advancements in high-throughput sequencing technologies, have strengthened the robustness and reliability of DNA barcoding. The study also recognizes the importance of addressing challenges such as intraspecific variation, incomplete reference databases, and technical limitations for the continued success of DNA barcoding. Moreover, the study explores the broader applications of DNA barcoding in conservation, monitoring efforts, and forensic sciences. From assessing biodiversity patterns to tracking endangered species and combating wildlife trafficking, DNA barcoding emerges as a versatile and indispensable tool for evidence-based decision-making.

    In unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding not only enhances our understanding of biodiversity but also empowers conservationists, researchers, and forensic scientists to make informed choices for the sustainable management of ecosystems and the preservation of our natural heritage. As this field continues to evolve, the study encourages ongoing collaborations, database expansions, and technological innovations to further unlock the potential of DNA barcoding in the realm of biodiversity assessment.

    The author declares that he has not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.


    Acknowledgments



    I would like to express our heartfelt appreciation and gratitude to Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University for their unwavering support and encouragement throughout our research project. Without their support, this study would not have been possible. I would also like to extend our sincere thanks to the faculty members and research staff at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, namely Prof. Farag Elessawy, Dr. Mohammad Mahzari, Dr. Mohammad Shaie Al-Matrafi and Dr. Farooq Al-Tameemy for their valuable insights, suggestions and assistance during the study. Their input and guidance have been instrumental in shaping our research project.

    Conflict of interest



    There is no conflict of interest associated with this work.

    [1] Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, et al. (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc R Soc Lond B 270: 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218
    [2] Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Clare EL, et al. (2007) Design and applicability of DNA arrays and DNA barcodes in biodiversity monitoring. BMC Biol 5: 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-5-24
    [3] Shokralla S, Porter TM, Gibson JF, et al. (2015) Massively parallel multiplex DNA sequencing for specimen identification using an Illumina MiSeq platform. Sci Rep 5: 9687. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09687
    [4] Cawthorn DM, Steinman HA, Witthuhn RC (2017) DNA barcoding reveals a high incidence of fish species misrepresentation and substitution on the South African market. Food Res Int 46: 30-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2011.11.011
    [5] Hollingsworth PM, Graham SW, Little DP (2011) Choosing and using a plant DNA barcode. PLoS One 6: e19254. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019254
    [6] Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, et al. (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc Biol Sci 270: 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218
    [7] Miescher JF (1871) Ueber die chemische Zusammensetzung der Eiterzellen. Med Chem Unters 4: 441-460.
    [8] Watson JD, Crick FHC (1953) Molecular structure of nucleic acids: A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature 171: 737-738. https://doi.org/10.1038/171737a0
    [9] Mullis KB, Faloona FA (1987) Specific synthesis of DNA in vitro via a polymerase-catalyzed chain reaction. Method Enzymol 155: 335-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(87)55023-6
    [10] Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN (2007) Bold: The barcode of life data system. Mol Ecol Notes 7: 355-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x
    [11] Shokralla S, Gibson JF, Nikbakht H, et al. (2014) Next-generation DNA barcoding: Using next-generation sequencing to enhance and accelerate DNA barcode capture from single specimens. Mol Ecol Resour 14: 892-901. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12236
    [12] Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.x
    [13] Deagle BE, Eveson JP, Jarman SN (2006) Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples–a case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool 3: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11
    [14] Kress WJ, Erickson DL (2007) A two-locus global DNA barcode for land plants: The coding rbcL gene complements the non-coding trnH-psbA spacer region. PLoS One 2: e508. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000508
    [15] Sanger F, Nicklen S, Coulson AR (1977) DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 74: 5463-5467. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.74.12.5463
    [16] Kress WJ, Erickson DL, Jones FA, et al. (2009) Plant DNA barcodes and a community phylogeny of a tropical forest dynamics plot in Panama. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106: 18621-18626. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909820106
    [17] Hajibabaei M, Baird DJ, Fahner NA, et al. (2005) A new way to contemplate Darwin's tangled bank: How DNA barcodes are reconnecting biodiversity science and biomonitoring. Phil Trans R Soc B 371: 20150330. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0330
    [18] CBOL Plant Working Group.A DNA barcode for land plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2009) 106: 12794-12797. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905845106
    [19] Bickford D, Lohman DJ, Sodhi NS, et al. (2017) Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 22: 148-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.004
    [20] Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Hebert PDN, et al. (2007) DNA barcoding: How it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. Trends Genet 23: 167-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2007.02.001
    [21] Collins RA, Cruickshank RH (2013) The seven deadly sins of DNA barcoding. Mol Ecol Resour 13: 969-975. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12046
    [22] Shekhovtsov SV, Shekhovtsova IN, Peltek SE (2019) DNA Barcoding: Methods and approaches. Biol Bull Rev 9: 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079086419060057
    [23] Ji Y, Ashton L, Pedley SM, et al. (2013) Reliable, verifiable and efficient monitoring of biodiversity via metabarcoding. Ecol Lett 16: 1245-1257. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12162
    [24] Barton NH, Hewitt GM (1985) Analysis of hybrid zones. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 16: 113-148. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.000553
    [25] Deagle BE, Eveson JP, Jarman SN (2006) Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples–a case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool 3: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11
    [26] Ogden R, Dawnay N, McEwing R, et al. (2009) Wildlife DNA forensics–bridging the gap between conservation genetics and law enforcement. Endang Species Res 9: 179-195. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00144
    [27] Holmes BH, Steinke D, Ward RD (2009) Identification of shark and ray fins using DNA barcoding. Fish Res 95: 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2008.09.036
    [28] Armstrong KF, Ball SL (2005) DNA barcodes for biosecurity: Invasive species identification. Phil Trans R Soc B 360: 1813-1823. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1713
    [29] Armstrong KF, Ball SL (2005) DNA barcodes for biosecurity: Invasive species identification. Phil Trans R Soc Land B: Biol Sci 360: 1813-1823. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1713
    [30] Packer L, Gibbs J, Sheffield C, et al. (2009) DNA barcoding and the mediocrity of morphology. Mol Ecol Resour 9: 42-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02631.x
    [31] Valentini A, Miquel C, Nawaz MA, et al. (2009) New perspectives in diet analysis based on DNA barcoding and parallel pyrosequencing: The trnL approach. Mol Ecol Resour 9: 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02352.x
    [32] Stoeckle MY, Gamble CC, Kirpekar R, et al. (2011) Commercial teas highlight plant DNA barcode identification successes and obstacles. Sci Rep 1: 42. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00042
    [33] Wong EHK, Hanner RH (2009) DNA barcoding detects market substitution in North American seafood. Food Res Int 41: 828-837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2008.07.005
    [34] Wilson EO (1992) The diversity of life.Harvard University Press.
    [35] Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity.Blackwell Publishing.
    [36] Taberlet P, Coissac E, Hajibabaei M, et al. (2012) Environmental DNA. Mol Ecol 21: 1789-1793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05542.x
    [37] Dickinson JL, Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annl Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41: 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144636
    [38] Taberlet P, Coissac E, Pompanon F, et al. (2012) Power and limitations of the chloroplast trnL (UAA) intron for plant DNA barcoding. Nucleic Acids Res 35: e14. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl938
    [39] Sayers EW, Cavanaugh M, Clark K, et al. (2019) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 48: D84-D86. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz956
    [40] Meyer CP, Paulay G (2005) DNA barcoding: Error rates based on comprehensive sampling. PLoS Biol 3: e422. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030422
    [41] Meier R, Zhang G, Ali F (2008) The use of mean instead of smallest interspecific distances exaggerates the size of the “barcoding gap” and leads to misidentification. Syst Biol 57: 809-813. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802406343
    [42] Vences M, Thomas M, Bonett RM (2005) Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: Chances and challenges. Phil Trans R Soc B 360: 1859-1868. http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1717
    [43] Darling JA, Mahon AR (2011) From molecules to management: Adopting DNA-based methods for monitoring biological invasions in aquatic environments. Environ Res 111: 978-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2011.02.001
    [44] Thomsen PF, Kielgast J, Iversen LL, et al. (2012) Detection of a diverse marine fish fauna using environmental DNA from seawater samples. PLoS One 7: e41732. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041732
    [45] Nagarajan M, Parambath AN, Prabhu VR (2020) DNA barcoding: A potential tool for invasive species identification. DNA barcoding and molecular phylogeny. Cham: Springer 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50075-7_3
    [46] Wells JD, Stevens JR (2008) Application of DNA-based methods in forensic entomology. Annu Rev Entomol 53: 103-120. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091423
    [47] Thomsen PF, Willerslev E (2015) Environmental DNA–An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity. Biol Conserv 183: 4-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019
    [48] Janzen DH, Hajibabaei M, Burns JM, et al. (2005) Wedding biodiversity inventory of a large and complex Lepidoptera fauna with DNA barcoding. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 360: 1835-1845. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1715
    [49] Valentini A, Pompanon F, Taberlet P (2008) DNA barcoding for ecologists. Trends Ecol Evol 24: 110-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.09.011
    [50] Lahaye R, van der Bank M, Bogarin D, et al. (2008) DNA barcoding the floras of biodiversity hotspots. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105: 2923-2928. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709936105
    [51] Ogden R, Dawnay N, McEwing R (2009) Wildlife DNA forensics–bridging the gap between conservation genetics and law enforcement. Endang Species Res 9: 179-195. https://doi.org/10.3354/ESR00144
    [52] Funk DJ, Omland KE (2003) Species-level paraphyly and polyphyly: Frequency, causes, and consequences, with insights from animal mitochondrial DNA. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34: 397-423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132421
    [53] Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2002) Introduction to conservation genetics.Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808999
    [54] Al-Juhani WS (2019) Evaluation of the capacity of the DNA barcode ITS2 for identifying and discriminating dryland plants. Genet Mol Res 18: gmr18133. https://doi.org/10.4238/gmr18133
    [55] Kress WJ, García-Robledo C, Uriarte M, et al. (2015) DNA barcodes for ecology, evolution, and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 30: 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.10.008
    [56] Moritz C, Cicero C (2004) DNA barcoding: Promise and pitfalls. PLoS Biol 2: e354. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020354
    [57] Pons J, Barraclough TG, Gomez-Zurita J, et al. (2006) Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. Syst Biol 55: 595-609. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150600852011
    [58] Gilbert MTP, Moore W, Melchior L, et al. (2007) DNA extraction from dry museum beetles without conferring external morphological damage. PLoS One 2: e272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000272
    [59] Gündüz İ, Jaarola M, Tez C, et al. (2007) Multigenic and morphometric differentiation of ground squirrels (Spermophilus, Sciuridae, Rodentia) in Turkey, with a description of a new species. Mol Phylogenet Evol 43: 916-935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.02.021
    [60] Frezal L, Leblois R (2009) Four years of DNA barcoding: Current advances and prospects. Infect Genet Evol 8: 727-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2008.05.005
    [61] DeSalle R, Egan MG, Siddall M (2014) The unholy trinity: Taxonomy, species delimitation and DNA barcoding. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 360: 1905-1916. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1722
    [62] Ivanova NV, deWaard JR, Hebert PDN (2006) An inexpensive, automation-friendly protocol for recovering high-quality DNA. Mol Ecol Notes 6: 998-1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01428.x
    [63] Taberlet P, Coissac E, Pompanon F, et al. (2012) Towards next-generation biodiversity assessment using DNA metabarcoding. Mol Ecol 21: 2045-2050. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05470.x
    [64] Oliver I, Beattie AJ (1996) Invertebrate morphospecies as surrogates for species: A case study. Conserv Biol 10: 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010099.x
    [65] Hebert PDN, Ratnasingham S, de Waard JR (2003) Barcoding animal life: Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc Biol Sci 270: S96-S99. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025
    [66] Turner CR, Barnes MA, Xu CCY, et al. (2014) Particle size distribution and optimal capture of aqueous macrobial eDNA. Methods Ecol Evol 5: 676-684. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12206
    [67] Leray M, Knowlton N (2017) DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112: 2076-2081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1424997112
    [68] Deveson IW, Gong B, Lai K, et al. (2021) Evaluating the analytical validity of circulating tumor DNA sequencing assays for precision oncology. Nat Biotechnol 39: 1115-1128. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-021-00857-z
    [69] Porter TM, Hajibabaei M (2018) Over 2.5 million COI sequences in GenBank and growing. PLoS One 13: e0200177. https://doi.org/10.1101/353904
    [70] Zhang AB, He LJ, Crozier RH, et al. (2010) Estimating sample sizes for DNA barcoding. Mol Phylogenet Evol 54: 1035-1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.09.014
    [71] Goldstein PZ, DeSalle R (2011) Integrating DNA barcode data and taxonomic practice: determination, discovery, and description. BioEssays 32: 135-147. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201000036
    [72] Shokralla S, Spall JL, Gibson JF, et al. (2012) Next-generation sequencing technologies for environmental DNA research. Mol Ecol 21: 1794-1805. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05538.x
    [73] Smith MA, Bertrand C, Crosby K, et al. (2012) Wolbachia and DNA barcoding insects: Patterns, potential, and problems. PLoS One 8: e36574. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036514
    [74] Ekblom R, Galindo J (2011) Applications of next generation sequencing in molecular ecology of non-model organisms. Heredity 107: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.152
    [75] Ellegren H (2014) Genome sequencing and population genomics in non-model organisms. Trends Ecol Evol 29: 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.09.008
    [76] Handelsman J (2004) Metagenomics: Application of genomics to uncultured microorganisms. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 68: 669-685. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.68.4.669-685.2004
    [77] Gilbert JA, Meyer F, Jansson J, et al. (2010) The earth microbiome project: Meeting report of the “1 EMP meeting on sample selection and acquisition” at Argonne National Laboratory October 6 2010. Stand Genomic Sci 3: 249-253. https://doi.org/10.4056/aigs.1443528
    [78] Aebersold R, Mann M (2016) Mass-spectrometric exploration of proteome structure and function. Nature 537: 347-355. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19949
    [79] Fiehn O (2002) Metabolomics–the link between genotypes and phenotypes. Plant Mol Biol 48: 155-171.
    [80] Hassan ESRE, Rostom M, Farghaly FE, et al. (2020) Bio-sorption for tannery effluent treatment using eggshell wastes; kinetics, isotherm and thermodynamic study. Egy J Pet 29: 273-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2020.10.002
    [81] Srivathsan A, Meier R (2012) On the inappropriate use of Kimura-2-parameter (K2P) divergences in the DNA-barcoding literature. Cladistics 28: 190-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00370.x
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Hu Li, Zhang Shangqing, Zhao Yae, Yang Fan, Zhang Xinyue, Liu Shirui, Zhang Tianyi, Niu Dongling, Classification, identification, and DNA barcoding study for common cockroach species (Dictyoptera: Blattaria) from China, 2025, 933, 03781119, 148981, 10.1016/j.gene.2024.148981
    2. Sukhamoy Dhabal, Anirban Kr Chakrabarty, Dipankar Banerjee, Chandra Kant Katiyar, Rajiva Kumar Rai, Sunil Kumar Dubey, Internal transcribed spacer (ITS): The powerful DNA barcode and phylogenetic marker for successful authentication of Withania somnifera, 2025, 52, 0301-4851, 10.1007/s11033-024-10167-7
    3. Manuela Mauro, Francesco Longo, Mario Lo Valvo, Aiti Vizzini, Antonino Di Grigoli, Slobodanka Radovic, Vincenzo Arizza, Luca Vecchioni, Laura La Paglia, Vinicius Queiroz, Marialetizia Ponte, Claudio Gargano, Paolo Salvatore Francesco Ciaccio, Domenico Vicari, Mirella Vazzana, The Use of Environmental DNA as Preliminary Description of Invertebrate Diversity in Three Sicilian Lakes, 2025, 15, 2076-2615, 355, 10.3390/ani15030355
    4. Abdulla Al-Asif, Sayali Nerurkar, Taxonomy in crisis: Addressing the shortage of taxonomists in a biodiversity hotspot era, 2024, 01, 01, 10.69517/jars.2024.01.02.0001
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(4480) PDF downloads(259) Cited by(4)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(7)  /  Tables(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog