Bio-Protection Research Centre, Lincoln University, PO Box 84, Lincoln, 7647, Canterbury, New Zealand.
Mol Ecol Resour. 2013 Nov;13(6):969-75. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12046. Epub 2012 Dec 27.
Despite the broad benefits that DNA barcoding can bring to a diverse range of biological disciplines, a number of shortcomings still exist in terms of the experimental design of studies incorporating this approach. One underlying reason for this lies in the confusion that often exists between species discovery and specimen identification, and this is reflected in the way that hypotheses are generated and tested. Although these aims can be associated, they are quite distinct and require different methodological approaches, but their conflation has led to the frequently inappropriate use of commonly used analytical methods such as neighbour-joining trees, bootstrap resampling and fixed distance thresholds. Furthermore, the misidentification of voucher specimens can also have serious implications for end users of reference libraries such as the Barcode of Life Data Systems, and in this regard we advocate increased diligence in the a priori identification of specimens to be used for this purpose. This commentary provides an assessment of seven deficiencies that we identify as common in the DNA barcoding literature, and outline some potential improvements for its adaptation and adoption towards more reliable and accurate outcomes.
尽管 DNA 条形码在广泛的生物学科领域都能带来广泛的好处，但在采用这种方法的研究的实验设计方面，仍存在一些缺陷。造成这种情况的一个根本原因是物种发现和标本鉴定之间经常存在混淆，这反映在假设的生成和检验方式上。尽管这些目标可以相关联，但它们是截然不同的，需要不同的方法学方法，而它们的混淆导致了常用分析方法的不当使用，如邻接法树、自举重采样和固定距离阈值。此外，凭证标本的错误鉴定也会对生命数据系统条形码等参考图书馆的最终用户产生严重影响，在这方面，我们主张在用于此目的的标本的预先鉴定方面更加谨慎。本评论对我们在 DNA 条形码文献中发现的七个常见缺陷进行了评估，并概述了一些潜在的改进方法，以使其适应并采用更可靠和准确的结果。
