Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMugnai, Francesco
dc.contributor.authorMeglécz, Emese
dc.contributor.authorCostantini, Federica
dc.contributor.authorAbbiati, Marco
dc.contributor.authorBavestrello, Giorgio
dc.contributor.authorBertasi, Fabio
dc.contributor.authorBo, Marzia
dc.contributor.authorCapa, Maria
dc.contributor.authorChenuil, Anne
dc.contributor.authorColangelo, Marina Antonia
dc.contributor.authorDe Clerck, Olivier
dc.contributor.authorGutiérrez, José Miguel
dc.contributor.authorLattanzi, Loretta
dc.contributor.authorLeduc, Michèle
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorMatterson, Kenan Oguz
dc.contributor.authorMikac, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorPlaisance, Laetitia
dc.contributor.authorPonti, Massimo
dc.contributor.authorRiesgo, Ana
dc.contributor.authorTuricchia, Eva
dc.contributor.authorWaeschenbach, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorWangensteen, Owen S.
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-22T08:25:12Z
dc.date.available2021-11-22T08:25:12Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-10
dc.description.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 animal species at a global scale based on online taxonomic and genetic databases (NCBI and BOLD) and (ii) compare the current status with data from ten years ago. Then, we focused our attention on occurrence data of marine animal species from five Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) representing the most well studied biodiversity hotspots, to identify 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 barcoded marine species increased from 9.5% to 14.2% since the last assessment in 2011, due to new barcodes both on already described species and on newly described ones (about 15,000 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 boost animal barcoding libraries for the marine realmen_US
dc.identifier.citationMugnai, Meglécz, Costantini, Abbiati M, Bavestrello, Bertasi, Bo M, Capa M, Chenuil A, Colangelo, De Clerck O, Gutiérrez, Lattanzi, Leduc, Martin D, Matterson, Mikac, Plaisance L, Ponti, Riesgo A, Rossi, Turicchia, Waeschenbach A, Wangensteen OS. Are well-studied marine biodiversity hotspots still blackspots for animal barcoding?. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2021;32en_US
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 1956489
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01909
dc.identifier.issn2351-9894
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/23096
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.journalGlobal Ecology and Conservation
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2021 The Author(s)en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Zoology and botany: 480::Marine biology: 497en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Zoologiske og botaniske fag: 480::Marinbiologi: 497en_US
dc.titleAre well-studied marine biodiversity hotspots still blackspots for animal barcoding?en_US
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


File(s) in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following collection(s)

Show simple item record