4.3 Article

A DNA barcode library for the water mites of Montenegro

期刊

BIODIVERSITY DATA JOURNAL
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PENSOFT PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.9.e78311

关键词

DNA barcoding; COI; water mites; Montenegro; species delimitation

资金

  1. Montenegrin Ministry of Science
  2. Polish National Science Centre, Poland [2017/27/N/NZ8/01568]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Water mites, a significant component of freshwater ecosystems, were studied with DNA barcoding in Montenegro, revealing new species records and highlighting the need for further morphological and molecular analysis for certain species.BIN and RESL analysis were utilized to classify the sequences.
Water mites (Acari, Hydrachnidia) are a significant component of freshwater ecosystems inhabiting a wide range of aquatic habitats. This study provides a first comprehensive DNA barcode library for the water mites of Montenegro. DNA barcodes were analysed from 233 specimens of water mites morphologically assigned to 86 species from 28 genera and 15 families. In the course of the study, four species, i.e. Lebertia reticulata (Koenike, 1919), Atractides inflatipalpis K.Viets, 1950, A. latipes (Szalay, 1935) and Parabrachypoda montii (Maglio, 1924) were molecularly confirmed as new for Montenegro and three species, i.e. Protzia octopora Lundblad, 1954, Piona laminata (Thor, 1901) and Unionicola ypsilophora (Bonz, 1783) are new for the Balkan Peninsula. Results are analysed using the Barcode Index Number system (BIN) and the Refined Single Linkage (RESL) of BOLD. The BIN assigned sequences to 98 clusters, while the RESL reveal 103 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Unique BINs were revealed for 72 species (83.7%), whereas twelve species (14%) were characterised by two BINs and two species (2.3%) with three BINs. Amongst the studied taxa, 14 species were found with a high intraspecific sequence divergences (> 2.2%), emphasising the need for additional comprehensive morphological and molecular analysis of these species.

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

4.3
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