Standard percent DNA sequence difference for insects does not predict species boundaries - PubMed
Review
Standard percent DNA sequence difference for insects does not predict species boundaries
Anthony I Cognato. J Econ Entomol. 2006 Aug.
Abstract
Diagnosis and assessment of species boundaries of economically important insects are often problematic because of limited morphological and/or biological characters. DNA data can help to identify and revise species. Nonoverlapping intra- and interspecific sequence divergences are often used as evidence for species. Thus, the establishment of a standardized percent nucleotide divergence to predict species boundaries would aid in cases where species status is suspect. However, given variation in nucleotide mutation rates and species concepts, association between a standard percent sequence divergence and species is questionable. This review surveys the percent DNA sequence difference found between sister-species of economically important insects, to assess whether a standard divergence associates with all taxa. Sixty-two comparisons of intra- and interspecific pairwise DNA differences were made for mitochondrial and nuclear loci spanning families of Isoptera, Phthiraptera, Hemiptera, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Hymenoptera. Intra- and interspecific sequence divergences varied widely among insects, 0.04-26.0 and 1.0-30.7%, respectively. The ranges of intra- and interspecific sequence divergences overlapped in 28 of 62 comparisons. This implies that a standardized percent sequence divergence would fail to correctly diagnose species for 45% of the cases. Common occurrence of nonmonophyly among closely related species probably explains this observation. Nonmonophyly and overlap of intra- and interspecific divergences were significantly associated. The reviewed studies suggest that a standard percent sequence divergence does not predict species boundaries among economically important insects. DNA data can help best to predict species boundaries via its inclusion in nonphenetic phylogenetic analysis and subsequent systematic expert scrutiny.
Similar articles
-
Whiting MF, Carpenter JC, Wheeler QD, Wheeler WC. Whiting MF, et al. Syst Biol. 1997 Mar;46(1):1-68. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/46.1.1. Syst Biol. 1997. PMID: 11975347
-
Morse GE, Farrell BD. Morse GE, et al. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2005 Aug;36(2):201-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2005.04.006. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2005. PMID: 15922631
-
Engelbrecht HM, Branch WR, Greenbaum E, Alexander GJ, Jackson K, Burger M, Conradie W, Kusamba C, Zassi-Boulou AG, Tolley KA. Engelbrecht HM, et al. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2019 Jan;130:357-365. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2018.10.023. Epub 2018 Oct 23. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2019. PMID: 30366085
-
Extreme rates and heterogeneity in insect DNA evolution.
Caccone A, Powell JR. Caccone A, et al. J Mol Evol. 1990 Mar;30(3):273-80. doi: 10.1007/BF02099997. J Mol Evol. 1990. PMID: 2109089 Review.
-
San Jose M, Doorenweerd C, Rubinoff D. San Jose M, et al. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2023 Aug;58:101052. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2023.101052. Epub 2023 May 6. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2023. PMID: 37150509 Review.
Cited by
-
Scarpassa VM, Alencar RB. Scarpassa VM, et al. Parasit Vectors. 2013 Sep 11;6(1):258. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-6-258. Parasit Vectors. 2013. PMID: 24021095 Free PMC article.
-
Kamimura Y, Lee CY, Yamasako J, Nishikawa M. Kamimura Y, et al. Zookeys. 2023 Feb 7;1146:115-134. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.1146.98248. eCollection 2023. Zookeys. 2023. PMID: 37214591 Free PMC article.
-
Kim H, Shin SE, Ko KS, Park SH. Kim H, et al. Biomed Res Int. 2020 Sep 28;2020:6235848. doi: 10.1155/2020/6235848. eCollection 2020. Biomed Res Int. 2020. PMID: 33062688 Free PMC article.
-
Limited performance of DNA barcoding in a diverse community of tropical butterflies.
Elias M, Hill RI, Willmott KR, Dasmahapatra KK, Brower AV, Mallet J, Jiggins CD. Elias M, et al. Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Nov 22;274(1627):2881-9. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2007.1035. Proc Biol Sci. 2007. PMID: 17785265 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources