Utilize este identificador para referenciar este registo: https://hdl.handle.net/1822/80004

TítuloRevision and annotation of DNA barcode records for marine invertebrates: Report of the 8th iBOL conference hackathon
Autor(es)Radulovici, Adriana E.
Vieira, Pedro Emanuel Ferreira Reis
Duarte, Sofia Alexandra Ferreira
Teixeira, Marcos André Machado Lima
Borges, Luisa M.S.
Deagle, Bruce E.
Majaneva, Sanna
Redmond, Niamh
Schultz, Jessica A.
Costa, Filipe O.
Palavras-chaveAnnotation
Data curation
DNA barcoding
Marine invertebrates
Metabarcoding
Reference libraries
Data2021
EditoraPensoft Publishers
RevistaMetabarcoding and Metagenomics
CitaçãoRadulovici AE, Vieira PE, Duarte S, Teixeira MAL, Borges LMS, Deagle BE, Majaneva S, Redmond N, Schultz JA, Costa FO (2021) Revision and annotation of DNA barcode records for marine invertebrates: report of the 8 th iBOL conference hackathon. Metabarcoding and Metagenomics 5: e67862. https://doi.org/10.3897/mbmg.5.67862
Resumo(s)The accuracy of specimen identification through DNA barcoding and metabarcoding relies on reference libraries containing records with reliable taxonomy and sequence quality. The considerable growth in barcode data requires stringent data curation, especially in taxonomically difficult groups such as marine invertebrates. A major effort in curating marine barcode data in the Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLD) was undertaken during the 8th International Barcode of Life Conference (Trondheim, Norway, 2019). Major taxonomic groups (crustaceans, echinoderms, molluscs, and polychaetes) were reviewed to identify those which had disagreement between Linnaean names and Barcode Index Numbers (BINs). The records with disagreement were annotated with four tags: A) MIS-ID (misidentified, mislabeled, or contaminated records), b) AMBIG (ambiguous records unresolved with the existing data), c) COMPLEX (species names occurring in multiple BINs), and d) SHARE (barcodes shared between species). A total of 83,712 specimen records corresponding to 7,576 species were reviewed and 39% of the species were tagged (7% MIS-ID, 17% AMBIG, 14% COMPLEX, and 1% SHARE). High percentages (>50%) of AMBIG tags were recorded in gastropods, whereas COMPLEX tags dominated in crustaceans and polychaetes. The high proportion of tagged species reflects either flaws in the barcoding workflow (e.g., misidentification, cross-contamination) or taxonomic difficulties (e.g., synonyms, undescribed species). Although data curation is essential for barcode applications, such manual attempts to examine large datasets are unsustainable and automated solutions are extremely desirable.
TipoArtigo
URIhttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/80004
DOI10.3897/mbmg.5.67862
e-ISSN2534-9708
Versão da editorahttps://mbmg.pensoft.net/article/67862/
Arbitragem científicayes
AcessoAcesso aberto
Aparece nas coleções:CBMA - Artigos/Papers

Ficheiros deste registo:
Ficheiro Descrição TamanhoFormato 
Radulovici et al 2021_MBMG.pdf633,22 kBAdobe PDFVer/Abrir

Partilhe no FacebookPartilhe no TwitterPartilhe no DeliciousPartilhe no LinkedInPartilhe no DiggAdicionar ao Google BookmarksPartilhe no MySpacePartilhe no Orkut
Exporte no formato BibTex mendeley Exporte no formato Endnote Adicione ao seu ORCID