4.5 Article

A DNA barcode reference library of Portuguese mosquitoes

期刊

ZOONOSES AND PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 68, 期 8, 页码 926-936

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/zph.12885

关键词

culicidae; cytochrome oxidase I (COI); DNA barcoding; mosquito surveillance; Portugal; species identification

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A DNA barcode reference library for mosquito species in Portugal was generated, identifying 26 species and 6 genera, providing a reliable framework for mosquito species identification.
Mosquitoes are important biological vectors of pathogens and species identification in all life stages is the first step for effective monitoring and control of mosquito-borne diseases. Molecular methods for species identification have been developed over the last years to overcome the limitations of the taxonomic identification based on morphology. DNA barcoding, using a fragment of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene, can be used for species identification but a reliable and comprehensive reference database of verified sequences is required. In this study, we aimed to generate a DNA barcode reference library for the identification of mosquito species from Portuguese mosquito fauna, including most relevant vector species. Mosquitoes captured under the National Vector Surveillance Program (REVIVE) were processed for DNA extraction, COI gene fragment amplification and sequencing. Nighty-eight barcode sequences were obtained, representing 26 species and 6 genera. Sequences were submitted to GenBank and BOLD and were used for validation of phenetic classification. Barcode Index Number (BIN) assignment and Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) were used and clustered COI sequences into twenty-five molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs). This is the first comprehensive study that combines morphological and molecular identification of most mosquito species present in Portugal aiming to offer a reliable framework for mosquito species identification.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据