English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

DNA barcoding is all too often derided by taxonomists with little understanding of how far this emerging subdiscipline of systematics has progressed since it was proposed by Hebert et al. (2003). A prime example is Ebach’s factually incorrect and misleading recent correspondence (Ebach 2011). Ebach and I agree on one point: indeed many readers of Zootaxa would have cringed as they read his letter, though perhaps the cause was a tasteless joke. For brevity I will address only three key points he raised about the uses for DNA barcoding.

DNA barcoding is useful for taxonomy: a reply to Ebach