Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Towards a better future for DNA barcoding: Evaluating monophyly- and distance-based species identification using COI gene fragments of Dacini fruit flies

  • Camiel Doorenweerd
  • , Michael San Jose
  • , Luc Leblanc
  • , Norman Barr
  • , Scott M. Geib
  • , Arthur Y.C. Chung
  • , Julian R. Dupuis
  • , Arni Ekayanti
  • , Elaida Fiegalan
  • , Kennantudawage S. Hemachandra
  • , Mohammad Aftab Hossain
  • , Chia Lung Huang
  • , Yu Feng Hsu
  • , Kimberly Y. Morris
  • , Andi Maryani A. Mustapeng
  • , Jerome Niogret
  • , Thai Hong Pham
  • , Nhien Thi Nguyen
  • , Uda G.A.I. Sirisena
  • , Terrence Todd
  • Daniel Rubinoff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Scopus citations

Abstract

The utility of a universal DNA ‘barcode’ fragment (658 base pairs of the Cytochrome C Oxidase I [COI] gene) has been established as a useful tool for species identification, and widely criticized as one for understanding the evolutionary history of a group. Large amounts of COI sequence data have been produced that hold promise for rapid species identification, for example, for biosecurity. The fruit fly tribe Dacini holds about a thousand species, of which 80 are pests of economic concern. We generated a COI reference library for 265 species of Dacini containing 5601 sequences that span most of the COI gene using circular consensus sequencing. We compared distance metrics versus monophyly assessments for species identification and although we found a ‘soft’ barcode gap around 2% pairwise distance, the exceptions to this rule dictate that a monophyly assessment is the only reliable method for species identification. We found that all fragments regularly used for Dacini fruit fly identification >450 base pairs long provide similar resolution. 11.3% of the species in our dataset were non-monophyletic in a COI tree, which is mostly due to species complexes. We conclude with recommendations for the future generation and use of COI libraries. We revise the generic assignment of Dacus transversus stat. rev. Hardy 1982, and Dacus perpusillus stat. rev. Drew 1971 and we establish Dacus maculipterus White 1998 syn. nov. as a junior synonym of Dacus satanas Liang et al. 1993.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere13987
JournalMolecular Ecology Resources
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Funding

We thank the Sabah Biodiversity Centre for providing collection permits [Ref. JKM/MBS.1000‐2/3 JLD.3 (88)], and the help of Chi‐Yeh Chien (Thai Royal Project Foundation), Thongsavanh. Taipangnavong, Vornthalom Chanthavong (FAO insect pest management Laos), Lira Chea, Ajay Markanday (FAO insect pest management Cambodia), Johannes Ketellar (FAO insect pest management ‐ Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific), Prabhat Kumar (Asian Institute of Technology), Po‐Yung Lai (University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources) and Shakil Ahmed Khan (Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission) with permits and logistics in our international collecting trips, as well as all other institutions that provided collecting and export permits. We thank the following people for contributing specimens: P. S. Aung, K. Badji, B. Bhandari, B. Bushe, S. Cowan, T. Doi, J. Drouin, J. Eiben, K. Englberger, U. Freitas, S. Graham, W. P. Haines, D. Haymer, N.‐N. Howcroft, F. Huda, J. Ismay, B. Ismay, E. Jang, G. Kang, A. Y. Kawahara, Q. K. Le, J. Y. Liang, Y.‐C. Lin, W. J. Lin, C. Mille, A. L. Norrbom, A. Ota, S. Ouedrago, N. Pierce, K. Pohlman, R. Putoa, J. B. Reil, E. J. Rodriguez, M. Shin, T. Stark, G. J. Steck, S. Tam, T. T. T. Vu, E. T. Vueti, P. Waisen, Y. Xia, T. Xian, N.‐N. Zhang. We greatly appreciate help from Daniel Nitta with the molecular wet‐lab work. We thank Carlos Lopez‐Vaamonde for useful comments and suggestions on haplotype terminology. The technical support and advanced computing resources from the University of Hawaiʻi Information Technology Services—Cyberinfrastructure and the USDA SCINet scientific computing infrastructure are gratefully acknowledged. This material was made possible, in part, by a Cooperative Agreement from the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). It may not necessarily express APHIS' views. Additional funding was provided by the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension (CSREES) project HAW00942‐H administered by the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii. USDA is an equal opportunity employer. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the USDA. Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Plant Protection Act 7721. These funds were managed as interagency or cooperative agreements between USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and USDA‐ARS (8130‐0893‐IA), the University of Hawaii's College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (8130‐0565‐CA) and the University of Idaho's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (8130‐0665‐CA).

Funders
Hawai'i Pacific University
USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension
U.S. Department of Agriculture
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service

    Keywords

    • DNA barcoding
    • Dacinae
    • Oriental fruit fly
    • Tephritidae
    • diagnostics
    • pest

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Biotechnology
    • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
    • Genetics

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Towards a better future for DNA barcoding: Evaluating monophyly- and distance-based species identification using COI gene fragments of Dacini fruit flies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this