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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the face of the decline of many insects, there is an increasing demand for contemporary, fast and cost-effective approaches to monitor the development of populations and species. Numerous scientists favor molecular methods, especially those involving barcoding of the CO1 gene, as an alternative to classical, morphology-based species identification. Moreover, DNA barcoding is also discussed as a suitable method to support species delimitations in complexes of closely related taxa. We used the available sequences of ground beetles from North and Central Europe  with additional ones we generated from Southern Europe and the Middle East to draw conclusion about the practicability of such approach for ground beetles.In general, while strong intraspecific differentiations within the CO1 fragment seem to characterize some wingless species (e.g.  Graphipterus serrator ,  Siagona longula ,  Carabus   problematicus , some  Platycarabus  species), others do not display much intraspecific variability (e.g.  Graphipterus multiguttatus  and  G. sharonae  within the “ G. serrator  clade”). These results certainly complicate the application of a metabarcoding approach without a larger database to delimitate these ground beetles. Furthermore, these results limit the applicability of the well-known barcoding gap, in ecological studies.With regards to taxonomic problems, mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences can provide support for taxonomic decisions. For example, the two taxa  Carabus variolosus  and  nodulosus  are characterized predominantely by K2P values lower than the barcoding gap. In view of the otherwise strong intraspecific differentiation within the genus  Carabus , these two taxa should be regarded as subspecies. In contrast, DNA barcoding can also help to identify "good" species. Mitochondrial and nuclear data suggest, for example, that an  Oreonebria  taxon and a  Platycarabus  taxon from the South-western Alps represent "good species", although they were usually considered as synonyms or subspecies. In another case, two tiger beetle taxa, which until a few months ago were considered to belong to the same species, show such strong differentiation that only two species can be postulated ( Calomera aulicoides  and  C. littoralis winkleri ).In summary, we can state that DNA sequences and the barcoding gap can help to define species delimitations in ground beetles. However, several species, including widespread sister species, cannot be identified by DNA barcoding for various reasons (e.g. young species or horizontal gene flow). Consequently, until an automated, fast, and reliable method to identify species from samples emerges, ecological investigations have to rely on classical, morphology-based identifications.

Heaven and hell: Spotlights on some DNA barcodes for species identification and delimitation in ground beetles