ArticlePloS one2025
Megabarcoding dark taxa - Assessing the utility of mass DNA barcoding for phorid fly species discovery.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Megabarcoding and Metabarcoding to Unlock Diversity and Distribution Data Shortfalls in Dark Taxa.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Phloxine B Staining is Compatible With High-Throughput DNA Barcoding of Meiofauna.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many hyperdiverse, small-bodied insect families contain numerous undescribed species, generally termed "dark taxa". Scuttle flies (Diptera: Phoridae), being among the most diverse insect groups globally, are a prime example. DNA barcoding can help delineate dark taxa, particularly when integrated with morphology, and/or additional molecular evidence. We sequenced COI-barcodes from 9,120 Finnish phorid specimens and initially identified them using the BOLD database. Furthermore, species identifications of all 843 specimens, belonging to other genera than Megaselia, were confirmed morphologically. Initially, the BOLD-based identifications matched the morphological identifications only in 68% of the cases, primarily due to numerous misidentifications in BOLD. After adjusting the BOLD reference identifications based on morphological analyses of male features, we established a reliable framework for female identification. This is advantageous for future identification of females, as they are often excluded from traditional identification keys. Only two species were discovered as new to Finland, demonstrating that Finnish fauna is well-known, except Megaselia. Although DNA barcodes show great promise for identifying phorids, incorrectly identified reference sequences remain challenging, not the functionality of barcode gene Cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) itself. The number of Megaselia BINs greatly exceeded the known Finnish species count, with many sequences lacking matches in BOLD. This further highlights Megaselia as a particularly dark group, for which genetic tools are essential for uncovering species identities and assessing diversity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.