Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/245951
Share/Export:
logo share SHARE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE
Title

Are well-studied marine biodiversity hotspots still blackspots for animal barcoding?

AuthorsMugnai, Francesco; Meglécz, Emese; Costantini, Federica; Abbiati, M.; Bavestrello, G.; Bertasi, F.; Bo, Marzia; Capa, María; Chenuil, A.; Colangelo, M. A.; De Clerck, Olivier; Gutiérrez, José Miguel; Lattanzi, Loretta; Leduc, Michèle; Martin, Daniel CSIC ORCID CVN ; Matterson, Kenan Oguz; Mikac, Barbara; Plaisance, Laetitia; Ponti, Massimo; Riesgo Gil, Ana ; Rossi, Vincent CSIC ORCID; Turicchia, Eva; Waeschenbach, Andrea; Wangensteen, Owen S. CSIC ORCID
Keywordsmetabarcoding
Biological diversity
genetic diversity
marine animals
Cryptic species
integrative taxonomy
Issue Date2021
PublisherCold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
CitationGlobal Ecology and Conservation 32 : e01909 (2021)
AbstractMarine biodiversity underpins ecosystem health and societal well-being. Preservation of biodiversity hotspots is a global challenge. Molecular tools, like DNA barcoding and metabarcoding, hold great potential for biodiversity monitoring, possibly outperforming more traditional taxonomic methods. However, metabarcoding-based biodiversity assessments are limited by the availability of sequences in barcoding reference databases; a lack thereof results in high percentages of unassigned sequences. In this study we (i) present the current status of known vs. barcoded marine species at a global scale based on online taxonomic and genetic databases; and (ii) compare the current status with data from ten years ago. Then we analyzed occurrence data of marine animal species from five Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) classified as biodiversity hotspots, to identify any consistent disparities in COI barcoding coverage between geographic regions and at phylum level. Barcoding coverage varied among LMEs (from 36.8% to 62.4% COI-barcoded species) and phyla (from 4.8% to 74.7% COI-barcoded species), with Porifera, Bryozoa and Platyhelminthes being highly underrepresented, compared to Chordata, Arthropoda and Mollusca. We demonstrate that although barcoded marine species increased from 9.5% to 14.2% since the last assessment in 2011, about 15,000 (corresponding to 7.8% increase) new species were described from 2011 to 2021. The next ten years will thus be crucial to enroll concrete collaborative measures and long term initiatives (e.g., Horizon 2030, Ocean Decade) to populate barcoding libraries for the marine realm.
Publisher version (URL)https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.12.448298
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/245951
Appears in Collections:(CEAB) Artículos




Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
Dani 2021.pdf879,8 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Mugnai 2021.pdf1,94 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record
Review this work

Page view(s)

104
checked on May 25, 2022

Download(s)

83
checked on May 25, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.