PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 19, 2019SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología268 citationsOpen Access

Assessment of BOLD and GenBank – Their accuracy and reliability for the identification of biological materials

KMKelly A. MeiklejohnNDNatalie DamasoJRJames Robertson

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Taxonomic identification of biological materials can be achieved through DNA barcoding, where an unknown "barcode" sequence is compared to a reference database. In many disciplines, obtaining accurate taxonomic identifications can be imperative (e.g., evolutionary biology, food regulatory compliance, forensics). The Barcode of Life DataSystems (BOLD) and GenBank are the main public repositories of DNA barcode sequences. In this study, an assessment of the accuracy and reliability of sequences in these databases was performed. To achieve this, 1) curated reference materials for plants, macro-fungi and insects were obtained from national collections, 2) relevant barcode sequences (rbcL, matK, trnH-psbA, ITS and COI) from these reference samples were generated and used for searching against both databases, and 3) optimal search parameters were determined that ensure the best match to the known species in either database. While GenBank outperformed BOLD for species-level identification of insect taxa (53% and 35%, respectively), both databases performed comparably for plants and macro-fungi (~81% and ~57%, respectively). Results illustrated that using a multi-locus barcode approach increased identification success. This study outlines the utility of the BLAST search tool in GenBank and the BOLD identification engine for taxonomic identifications and identifies some precautions needed when using public sequence repositories in applied scientific disciplines.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Meiklejohn et al. (2019) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69db5707f7e0c66ced835a1chttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217084
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Fungal Molecular Systematics1991 · 908 citations
  2. 2Over 2.5 million COI sequences in GenBank and growing2018 · 180 citations
  3. 3An outlook on the fungal internal transcribed spacer sequences in GenBank and the introduction of a web‐based tool for the exploration of fungal diversity2008 · 126 citations
  4. 4Intraspecific ITS Variability in the Kingdom Fungi as Expressed in the International Sequence Databases and Its Implications for Molecular Species Identification2008 · 824 citations
  5. 5Evaluating the feasibility of using candidate DNA barcodes in discriminating species of the large Asteraceae family2010 · 183 citations