4.6 Article

Identification of forensically important blow fly species (Diptera: Calliphoridae) in China by mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I gene differentiation

Journal

INSECT SCIENCE
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages 554-564

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7917.2010.01377.x

Keywords

Calliphoridae; China; cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI); forensic entomology; species identification

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [30672354]
  2. National University Student Innovation Test Plan (NMOE) [YC09139, YC10107, YC10117]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Unambiguous and rapid sarcosaphagous insect species identification is an essential requirement for forensic investigations. Although some insect species are difficult to classify morphologically, they can be effectively identified using molecular methods based on similarity with abundant authenticated reference DNA sequences in local databases. However, local databases are still relatively incomplete in China because of the large land area with distinct regional conditions. In this study, 75 forensically important blow flies were collected from 23 locations in 16 Chinese provinces, and a 278-bp segment of the cytochrome oxidase subunit I gene of all specimens was successfully sequenced. Phylo-genetic analysis of the sequenced segments showed that all Calliphorid specimens were properly assigned into nine species with relatively strong supporting values, thus indicating that the 278-bp cytochrome oxidase subunit one region is suitable for identification of Calliphorid species. The clear difference between intraspecific threshold and interspecific divergence confirmed the potential of this region for Calliphorid species identification, especially for distinguishing between morphologically similar species. Intraspecific geographic variations were observed in Lucilia sericata (Meigen, 1826) and Lucilia caesar (Linnaeus, 1758).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available