Content uploaded by Christopher Marlowe Caipang
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christopher Marlowe Caipang on Oct 05, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Christopher Marlowe Caipang
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christopher Marlowe Caipang on Sep 13, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Corresponding author: Email: cacaipang@up.edu.ph, cmacaipang@gmail.com;
Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023
Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology
Volume 44, Issue 20, Page 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
ISSN: 0256-971X (P)
DNA Barcoding and Its Applications:
A Review
Rencellie T. Mampang a, Karissa Cate A. Auxtero a,
Carl Jester C. Caldito a, Jair M. Abanilla a,
Geriell Anne G. Santos a
and Christopher Marlowe A. Caipang a*
a Division of Biological Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Visayas,
Miag-ao 5023, Iloilo, Philippines.
Authors’ contributions
This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. Author CMAC coordinated, and
supervised the work. Authors RTM, KCAA, CJCC, JMA and GAGS conducted the literature review
and wrote the original draft of the manuscript. All authors reviewed and edited the draft and have read
and agreed to the submission of the manuscript.
Article Information
DOI: 10.56557/UPJOZ/2023/v44i203646
Editor(s):
(1) Dr. Ana Cláudia Correia Coelho, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Portugal.
(2) Dr. P. Veera Muthumari, V. V. Vanniaperumal College for Women, India.
Reviewers:
(1) Gazi Nurun Nahar Sultana, Dhaka University, Bangladesh.
(2) Eleni Papanikolaou, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece.
(3) Prerana Sakharwade, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education & Research, India.
Received: 01/07/2023
Accepted: 06/09/2023
Published: 13/09/2023
ABSTRACT
The use of DNA sequences has revolutionized biological classification, specifically through the
utilization of the DNA barcode technique, which involves amplifying a standardized DNA fragment
for the identification of plant and animal species. The methods and techniques involved in DNA
barcoding are introduced and visualized in the paper. As incorporated in various applications in
diverse fields, a comprehensive discussion on DNA barcoding is presented, highlighting its
Review Article
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
70
relevance and use in species identification and discovery. Furthermore, we explore its different
roles, ranging from biodiversity assessment and conservation to food safety, forensic science,
biosecurity, and public health. We also introduce the current limitations of the technique and its
potential use in future applications of genetics-based discoveries.
Keywords: Applications; barcode; eukaryotic identification; cytochrome c oxidase subunit I.
1. INTRODUCTION
A universal language in the form of DNA
sequences revolutionized the world of biological
classification. From visual examinations,
morphological characteristics, and extensive
taxonomic knowledge transformed into a snippet
of a genetic code can easily unravel the
mysteries of biodiversity. Such a revolutionary
technique was proposed by Herbert in 2003, a
standardized genetic marker for the wide
identification of biological specimens – the DNA
barcoding, where its principle lies on amplifying a
648-base pair region from the mitochondrial
cytochrome c oxidase subunit I [1].
Consequently, numerous projects rose to
promote the use of this molecular method
including (1) the Barcode of Life project, which
focused on the identification of eukaryotes, (2)
the Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL),
which was established in 2004 for developing a
standard protocol along with an extensive DNA
barcode library, and (3) a recent international
collective effort to initiate a DNA barcode library
for all eukaryotic species from the International
Barcode of Life project (iBOL) [1]. The acquisition
of large-scale genetic data allowed researchers
to transcend from traditional methods to a
promising technique for rapid and accurate
eukaryotic identification.
DNA barcoding aims to utilize genetic information
from standardized short sequences of DNA, and
the gene region must fulfill the three criteria: (1)
possess genetic variability and divergence on a
species level; (2) contain conserved flanking
regions for creating universal PCR primers in a
taxonomic application; and (3) own relatively
short sequence length advantageous to current
DNA extraction and amplification techniques.
Such requirements will enable the development
of accurate species-level barcodes for
identification, where a comprehensive online
digital repository of DNA barcodes will serve as a
reference database for matching unidentified
samples from various environments [2].
In this review paper, the advanced research
and application of DNA barcoding in various
fields are discussed. It focuses on species
identification and discovery, as well as the
resolution of taxonomic ambiguities. It also
highlights the role of DNA barcodes in
biodiversity assessment and conservation as
well as the identification of endangered
species. Furthermore, this review discusses
DNA barcoding as an important tool in food
safety, forensic science, biosecurity and public
health.
2. DNA BARCODING: OVERVIEW ON
METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
As the name suggests, DNA barcoding, similar to
supermarket barcodes that undergo scanning at
the counter to display product information,
resembles that concept as a biodiversity,
biological, and taxonomical research tool.
According to Lebonah et al.,[3] identifying or
assigning a "barcode" to an organism in a
manner that makes it distinct from other species
uses sequenced data from PCR amplicons
produced at specific regions via DNA barcoding.
Moreover, varying species morphology, ecology,
and behavior constitute the criteria that
determine DNA sequences [4]. Therefore, the
recognition of species subsequently becomes
possible using their genetic markers in a method
by Kress & Erickson [5]. This includes: (1)
building the barcode library of known species
and (2) matching or assigning the barcode of the
unknown sequence of the unknown sample
against the barcode library for identification. To
ensure a high level of specificity, DNA barcoding
ensues by using the DNA sequence's short
fragment functioning to code for the
mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I
gene also called the cox1 or CO1 gene.
Furthermore, establishing a library of DNA
barcodes relies on the sequences compared to a
taxonomically known sample to determine
taxonomical identification [6]. On the other hand,
two chloroplast gene fragments from the
RuBisCo large subunit (rbcl) and maturase K
(matK) genes are widely used in plants [7]. To
understand the workflow of DNA barcoding, a
visual example is shown below:
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
71
Fig. 1. The DNA barcoding workflow based on Wilson et al. [6]
3. APPLICATIONS OF DNA BARCODING
The characteristic of DNA being unalterable,
detectable, and species-specific in every cell
makes it a highly effective basis for finding
solutions to issues in almost, if not all, every field
of research. As such, the use of DNA barcodes
in studies has had profound advantages in
various fields, including ecology, food science,
forensic science, and medical science, as it
primarily involves the analysis of specific regions
of an organism’s DNA for identification. Its
applications—to be further discussed below—
continue to drive advancements in such fields,
thus proving to be invaluable in offering new
insights and possible solutions to ever-increasing
challenges brought about by the present
technological society.
3.1 Species Identification and Discovery
The identification of organisms is a fundamental
element in assessing biodiversity and
establishing our core understanding of the
biological world. There are an estimated 8.7
million eukaryotic species on Earth, and a report
says that 86% of land species and 91% of
marine species have yet to be discovered and
described [8]. These figures will increase even
more if we try to account for the prokaryotic
species. This only shows that species
identification is a hard and slow process because
it requires an accurate method, skilled
taxonomists, and substantial funds. Traditionally,
taxonomy was based on morphological
characterization, which is time-consuming,
requires skilled taxonomists, and may give false
identification due to overlapping characters,
phenotypic plasticity, and the occurrence of
cryptic species [9-10]. Because of these issues,
new methods have been introduced to support a
morphology-based taxonomy. Over the past
decade, several molecular tools have emerged
for taxonomists to identify species, one of which
is DNA barcoding. DNA barcoding is an effective
method for identifying species at any stage of
development, as well as when phenotypic
plasticity and cryptic creatures are a concern
[11]. DNA barcoding differs from other molecular
tools primarily in the use of standard markers
that differ between kingdoms.
Hebert et al. [12] proposed the mitochondrial
gene cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) as a
universal marker or ‘DNA barcode’ for the global
bioidentification for animals. Different sections or
fragments of this gene are used to 'barcode'
animal phyla, including invertebrates, birds, fish,
and mammals. Mitochondrial genes are generally
haploid, lack introns, and contain limited
recombination [13]. COI is prioritized over other
mitochondrial genes due to its ability to generate
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
72
sequence data within a fair amount of time in a
cost-effective way [14]. Furthermore,
mitochondrial COI is preferred over nuclear
genes as universal animal barcode because it is
more informative in differentiating or
distinguishing closely related species [15]. This
owes to the ability of the mitochondrial DNA to
mutate and evolve at a high rate compared to the
nuclear DNA [16].
To date, the COI gene has been utilized as a
barcoding gene in several animals. DNA
barcoding was largely successful in identifying
immature specimens, [17-18] extinct species, [19-
20] and individual species in different stages of
their life cycles [21-23]. Potential cryptic species
were also identified by using this technique. For
instance, an underestimated genus Triplophysa
from the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau has been studied
by Wang et al. [24] Based on the combination of
morphological methods and DNA barcoding of
1,630 specimens, it was found out that there
were 24 native species, two of which were cryptic
species, namely T. robusta and T. minxianensis.
While it was established that COI is a standard
marker for DNA barcoding of animals, other
researchers have tried other genes to test the
appropriateness of COI as a marker. For
instance, in a primate study by Jackson & Niman,
[25] they evaluated the efficiency of 12
mitochondrial protein-coding genes (cytochrome
c oxidase subunits I, II, and III; cytochrome b;
NADH dehydrogenase subunits 1, 2, 3, 4, 4L,
and 5; and ATPase subunits 6 and 8) using
Great Apes as a model. The results revealed that
NADH dehydrogenase 5 (ND5) and cytochrome
c oxidase subunit II (COII) produce the most
pronounced barcoding gaps within the genus and
family level than between species compared to
COI. Because of this, it was recommended that
these two genes (ND5 and COII) be used as
appropriate markers in primate species
delineation.
Although the COI gene is regarded as a
universal barcode in animals, its effectiveness in
fungi and plants is unreliable. In fungi, the
internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region has been
recognized as a standard barcode marker
because it is more effective than the COI gene at
distinguishing closely related taxa [26]. In plants,
there are various prospects for DNA barcoding.
The Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL)
Plant Working Group in 2009 proposed the
chloroplast genes maturase K (matK) and
ribulose bisphosphate carboxylase (rbcL) as
fundamental barcodes, and intergenic sequence
trnH-psbA and nuclear gene ITS as the
supplementary barcodes of plants [27].
3.2 Biodiversity Assessment and
Conservation
DNA barcoding plays a crucial role in the
assessment and conservation of biodiversity,
offering a powerful tool to scientists and
researchers. The purpose of DNA barcoding lies
in its ability to provide accurate species
identification, overcome limitations of traditional
taxonomy, and enhance our understanding of
ecosystems [12].
DNA barcoding aids in assessing and monitoring
biodiversity by gaining useful information about
the diversity and abundance of life by
documenting and analyzing the DNA of
numerous species within an ecosystem. Several
studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of
DNA barcoding in biodiversity assessment. For
instance, Hebert et al. [27] conducted research
on bird species and found that DNA barcoding
successfully differentiated closely related species
with high accuracy. Similarly, Hajibabaei et al.
[28] focused on terrestrial arthropods and
demonstrated that DNA barcoding rapidly and
accurately identified species, even in complex
ecosystems. This data proves essential to
understanding ecosystem health, tracking
changes in species composition over time, and
recognizing invasive species [28].
Furthermore, DNA barcoding contributes to
conservation efforts by making it easier to
identify endangered or threatened species.
Numerous studies have shown that DNA
barcoding is useful for conservation. Drescher et
al. [29], for example, used DNA barcoding to
detect illegally traded shark fins in the Hong
Kong market, resulting in focused conservation
activities. DNA barcoding aids in the discovery
and prevention of illegal wildlife trade by allowing
species to be identified even when they are
processed or fragmented. Moreover, by
examining DNA samples from populations, DNA
barcoding aids in the monitoring and protection
of endangered species. By accurately identifying
these species through DNA barcoding,
conservationists can prioritize their protection,
implement targeted conservation measures, and
enforce legislation to prevent their illegal trade
[12].
3.3 Food Safety and Authentication
Several articles have reviewed the application of
DNA barcoding to food safety, traceability, and
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
73
piracy in freshly commercialized and processed
products [30-32]. The increase of general public
interest in food origins and its nutrient value spur
the demand for modern technologies that test
food integrity. DNA barcoding is one such
method that is used for the identification and
authentication of raw or manufactured food
materials from either single or mixed species
products, where common methods of
characterization often fail. This helps in the
detection of adulterated food products, making it
crucial in ensuring high quality standards in the
global food industry and market.
Applications of DNA barcoding to the traceability
of seafood, meat, and plant ingredients are
particularly well-studied [31]. Essentially, it is an
extension of the current technology used for
taxonomic and phylogenetic research, as
previously discussed. Direct sequencing of
targeted DNA amplicons allows for species
identification even in highly modified food
products; thus, a more in-depth and “true”
analysis of the product’s composition is made
possible. For example, DNA barcoding has been
used in assessing meat and poultry species in
food products, authenticating commercial
seafood products, and tracing minor crops and
plant products [33-35]. Such applications show
how DNA barcoding can become a standard
routine test for food quality control and
traceability.
3.4 Forensic Science and Crime
Investigations
The use of DNA barcoding in the field of forensic
science has been of great help in providing
valuable insights into criminal investigations.
Cases that involve the need for species
identification of animals and plants and the
analysis of trace biological materials are greatly
impacted by the advent of this molecular method.
Particularly, the application of DNA barcoding in
the illegal wildlife trade and in the analysis of
crime scenes has helped provide accurate and
reliable information to help further their
respective investigations.
3.5 On Illegal Wildlife Trade
The origins of the illegal wildlife trade are often
hard to detect due to their vast network.
Moreover, proper identification of wildlife parts
and products may require DNA-based methods
due to them being naturally degraded or modified
in ways that make it hard for traditional
techniques to be applied [36]. As such, DNA
barcoding becomes an invaluable tool in
determining whether a plant or animal product or
part is protected or is legally traded through
species identification. Analysis of the sequences
of mtDNA that are conserved among species
makes accurate identification of such species
possible. Moreover, the geographical origin of a
sample can also be identified through analyzing
within-species variability in the mtDNA
sequences, thus, providing information as to the
possible main source of the products and parts
for further investigation [37].
3.6 On Crime Scene Analysis
A well-known method for acquiring evidence from
crime scenes is through DNA profiling. Although
not as specific in a way that it creates a unique
genetic profile of an individual from specific
regions of an individual’s genome, DNA
barcoding, compared to DNA profiling, can be
applied to gathering evidence from
environmental DNA (eDNA) through
metabarcoding. Metabarcoding follows the same
principle as barcoding but involves the analysis
of multiple species in a mixed sample. An
example is exhibited in a case discussed by Liu
et al., [38] wherein a suspect was identified
through metabarcoding plant DNA from eDNA
collected from the crime scene. Dried mud
removed from the pants of one of the suspects
was found to match the mud from where the
crime occurred; thus, solving the case. Although
prevalent challenges currently block the
continued application of this method in criminal
investigations such as the lack of an “ideal”
barcode for plant species, it still shows high
potential for extensive applications [38].
DNA barcoding is also applied in the fields of
forensic entomology and palynology, which
respectively refer to the study of insects and
pollen in criminal investigations [39-40].
However, having a comprehensive DNA barcode
reference database is especially crucial in
obtaining accurate and reliable results when
conducting species determination tests in such
fields. With that, research efforts are ongoing for
the establishment of barcode libraries for this
purpose [40-43].
3.7 Biosecurity and Public Health
DNA barcoding has had several important
applications in the fields of biosecurity and public
health in recent years. The use of this molecular
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
74
method in the taxonomic determination of
pathogenic organisms is crucial in differentiating
morphologically similar species that cause
different diseases and in understanding how it
interacts with the human body. Specifically,
identification of parasitic species that act as
vectors to a certain disease can be done through
DNA barcoding [7].
Numerous studies have also used DNA
barcoding to investigate the integrity of
medicines and their pharmaceutical ingredients.
The application of DNA barcoding in the
pharmaceutical field includes the identification of
specific animal or plant species used as
ingredients in various medicines. It specifically
allows for the detection of unlabeled and
threatened plant or animal species used in
various types of medicines, including raw
materials and processed products [44]. This
proves to be especially helpful with the
persistence of various threats to biological
diversity, which has caused a rise in the
emergence of unlisted substances added to
products either intentionally or by accident.
Authentication of plant species used in traditional
medicines in Asia is significantly well-studied [45-
49]. For example, a DNA barcoding system for
common herbal plants, such as black pepper,
ginger, and guava, along with 109 other species
in the tropics, was established using the rbcl and
trnH-psbA genes for primary and secondary
differentiation [48]. Another study that involves
the use of barcoding to address this issue is
applied in the DNAINK project, which aims to
detect the deterioration of medicinal products
over time and monitor its authenticity [50].
4. PRESENT LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
PROSPECTS
DNA barcoding has had significant success in
animal differentiation due to a 648-base pair in
the cox1 gene, a short gene. Comparatively,
plant identification requires a recommended plant
DNA barcode of 1 and 2 genomic regions by the
ITS (internal transcribed spacer) [51]. However,
according to the same set of authors, the use of
chloroplast regions does not pose an accurate
measure of plant identification due to their
background as maternally inherited hybrids. In
discerning target species from closely related
species, a minimum of 3% difference between
species is a suitable barcode for identification at
the species level [52]. The former, being the
basis, also considers that taxonomic groups may
contain genetic differences. Amid the challenges
to DNA barcoding related to genomic loci in
identifying plants, DNA analysis in closely related
species does not conclude beyond the grasp of
feasibility.
Standardization is a property that makes DNA
barcodes fundamentally new but with much
controversy as it proposes one or more reference
genes for phylogenetic analyses effective in the
microbial community but has stirred debates due
to its "one size fits all" notion [53]. A clear
barcode gap and monophyletic species in plants
would make a barcode system effective. In
addition, the CO1 gene used in animals is
deemed ineffective in discriminating against
hybrid species [54]. From these two, the
limitations of using a DNA barcode seem to
diminish its potential. Challenges reek in the use
of genetic information, but DNA barcodes
continue to offer a positive outlook in the form of
prospects.
In immense consideration of the applications of
DNA barcoding, the prospects are remarkable,
especially in a critical era of possible mass
extinction of species, where this multifaceted tool
equips biodiversity conservation advocates with
an identifier of species at greater risk of ceasing
existence. The initially stated discussion on
methodology also stresses how DNA barcoding
uses a library of DNA barcodes to help identify
new species, thus introducing a reference for
comparison of extant species in attempts to
name discoveries. Outside of biodiversity, DNA
barcoding holds a cascade of benefits for
criminal investigations, particularly in forensic
matters. For instance, illegal activities have
negatively consumed wildlife to capitalize on the
wildlife trade. In crime scene investigations,
further accompanied with better leads, DNA
barcoding enables product sourcing of either
plant or animal, consequently determining the
nature of acquisition—which might be
unauthorized or illegal, otherwise approved for
trade. In biosecurity and public health, DNA
barcoding is a protective barrier against the
permeation of falsified animal- or plant-based
medicines that might compromise
pharmacological credibility and amplify health
risks among consumers. In unmonitored
circulation at accessible prices, the dangers of
these medications will impact healthcare quality
and might result in fatal cases among consumers
seeking alternatives. With DNA barcoding, the
future of the fields mentioned above heavily
leans toward becoming promising as it expands
in applications and delivers more strong points
as a tool concentrated on genetics.
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
75
5. CONCLUSION
The birth of DNA barcoding, a revolutionary
technique in species identification and
classification, opened doors to applying
molecular diagnoses to various fields focusing on
species identification and discovery, biodiversity
assessment and conservation, food safety and
authenticity, forensic science and crime
investigations, and biosecurity and public health.
Through the use of specific genetic markers,
such as the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase
subunit I (COI) gene in animals and chloroplast
gene fragments in plants, a reference database
or barcode library is founded where barcodes of
unknown samples are matched.
In the field of species identification and
discovery, DNA barcoding boosted the accurate
identification of organisms, overcoming
limitations posed by traditional morphology-
based taxonomy. DNA barcodes were
particularly successful in addressing the
challenges of phenotypic plasticity as well as
untangling cryptic species. DNA barcoding has
been widely used in animals, plants, and fungi.
The mitochondrial COI is highly favored over
nuclear genes for its ability to generate sequence
data quickly and cost-effectively. While COI has
been successfully used in barcoding animals,
other genes have been tested, like ND5 and
COII, that show promise as markers for primate
species delineation. In fungi, the ITS region is the
preferred barcode marker, while for plants,
various genes proposed as barcodes include
matK, rbcL, trnH-psbA, and ITS.
For biodiversity assessment and conservation,
DNA barcoding contributed to documenting and
analyzing DNA from various species within an
ecosystem. With accurate differentiation of
closely related species, DNA barcoding has
provided valuable information regarding species
diversity, abundance, changes in species
composition over time, and the existence of
invasive species in complex ecosystems. In
addition, DNA barcodes aid in the identification of
endangered species and the detection of illegal
wildlife trade, pushing strong conservation efforts
and law enforcement.
Another application of DNA barcoding
encompasses food safety and authentication,
involving the technique’s usage in recognizing
the significance of food quality by detecting
product adulteration and tracing food origins,
ensuring high-quality standards in the global food
industry. Similarly, in forensic science and crime
investigations, the tracing of biological materials
by species identification of animals and plants is
done through DNA barcoding to combat illegal
wildlife trade, identify suspects via environmental
DNA analysis, and provide evidence in criminal
investigations. Whereas in the context of
biosecurity and public health, DNA barcoding is
used for the taxonomic determination of
pathogenic organisms and the identification of
parasitic vectors. Moreover, the molecular
technique contributes to the integrity of
medicines by detecting unlabeled and threatened
plant or animal species that were used as
ingredients. Additionally, DNA barcoding has
been extensively applied for the authentication of
plant species used for traditional medicines,
particularly in Asia.
Considering the extensive application of DNA
barcoding, there are hindrances that are
nonetheless feasible to solve. The current
progress of DNA barcode technology holds bright
prospects, including the establishment of
comprehensive barcode libraries, the
development of new markers for specific
taxonomic groups, and the integration of DNA
barcoding with other technologies for the
enhancement of biodiversity research and
conservation. More significantly, it opens new
horizons for the protection and conservation of
species at risk of extinction at the hands of illegal
trading systems, and misuse and falsification in
medicinal healthcare.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful for the support provided
by the Division of Biological Sciences, College of
Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines
Visayas, during the preparation of this
manuscript.
COMPETING INTERESTS
Authors have declared that no competing
interests exist.
REFERENCES
1. Jinbo U, Kato T, Ito M. Current progress in
DNA barcoding and future implications for
entomology. Entomol Sci. 2011;14(2):107-
24.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-8298.2011.00449.x
2. Kress WJ, Erickson DL. DNA bar codes:
genes, genomics, and bioinformatics. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(8):2761-2.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0800476105
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
76
3. Lebonah DE, Dileep A, Chandrasekhar K,
Sreevani S, Sreedevi B, Pramoda Kumari
J. DNA barcoding on bacteria: a review.
Adv Biol. 2014;2014(Aug 26):1-9.
DOI: 10.1155/2014/541787
4. Wilson JJ, Sing KW, Floyd RM, Hebert,
PDN. DNA bar codes and insect
biodiversity. In: Foottit RG, Adler PH,
editors. Insect biodiversity: science and
society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
2017;2:575-92.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118945568.ch17
5. Kress WJ, Erickson DLDNA. Bar codes:
Methods and protocols. Methods in
molecular Biology™, 3-8. Wilson. 2012;6.
DOI: 10.1007/978-1
6. JJ, Sing KW, Jaturas N. DNA barcoding:
Bioinformatics workflows for beginners.
Reference Module in Life Sciences; 2018.
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-809633-8.20468-
8 61779-591-6_1.
7. 7. Fišer Pečnikar Ž, Buzan EV. 20 years
since the introduction of DNA barcoding:
From theory to application. J Appl Genet.
2014;55(1):43-52.
DOI: 10.1007/s13353-013-0180-y
8. 8. Sweetlove L. Number of species on
Earth tagged at 8.7 million. Nature; 2011.
DOI: 10.1038/news.2011.498
9. 9. Park MH, Jung JH, Jo E, Park KM, Baek
YS, Kim SJ, et al. Utility of mitochondrial
co1 sequences for species discrimination
of Spirotrichea ciliates (protozoa,
ciliophora). Mitochondrial DNA A DNA
Mapp Seq Anal. 2019;30(1):148-55.
DOI: 10.1080/24701394.2018.1464563
10. Wang T, Zhang Y, Yang Z, Liu Z, Du Y.
DNA barcoding reveals cryptic diversity in
the underestimated genus Triplophysa
(Cypriniformes: Cobitidae, Nemacheilinae)
from the northeastern Qinghai-Tibet
Plateau. BMC Evol Biol. 2020;20(1).
DOI: 10.1186/s12862-020-01718-0
11. Imtiaz A, Nor SAM, Naim DM. Review:
progress and potential of DNA barcoding
for species identification of fish species.
Biodivers J Biol Divers. 2017;18(4):
1394-405.
DOI: 10.13057/biodiv/d180415
12. Hebert PD, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard
JR. Biological identifications through DNA
barcodes. Proc Biol Sci. 2003;270(1512):
313-21.
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2218
13. Antil S, Abraham JS, Sripoorna S, Maurya
S, Dagar J, Makhija S, et al. DNA
barcoding, an effective tool for species
identification: A review. Mol Biol Rep.
2023;50(1):761-75.
DOI: 10.1007/s11033-022-08015-7
14. Jose D, Harikrishnan M. Molecular
markers and their optimization: Addressing
the problems of nonhomology using
Decapod Coi Gene. Biochemical analysis
tools – methods for bio-molecules studies;
2019.
DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.86993
15. Hebert PDN, Ratnasingham S, deWaard
JR. Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c
oxidase subunit 1 divergences among
closely related species. Proc Biol Sci.
2003;270;Suppl 1:S96-9.
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025
16. Waugh J. DNA barcoding in animal
species: progress, potential and pitfalls.
BioEssays. 2007;29(2):188-97.
DOI: 10.1002/bies.20529
17. Shin S, Jung S, Heller K, Menzel F, Hong
TK, Shin JS et al. DNA barcoding of
Bradysia (Diptera: Sciaridae) for detection
of the immature stages on agricultural
crops. J Appl Entomol. 2015;139(8):
638-45.
DOI: 10.1111/jen.12198
18. Meiklejohn KA, Wallman JF, Dowton M.
DNA barcoding identifies all immature life
stages of a forensically important flesh fly
(Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J Forensic Sci.
2013;58(1):184-7.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2012.02220.x
19. Nazari V, Schmidt BC, Prosser S, Hebert
PD. Century-old DNA barcodes reveal
phylogenetic placement of the extinct
Jamaican sunset moth, Urania sloanus
Cramer (Lepidoptera: Uraniidae). PLOS
ONE. 2016;11(10):e0164405.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164405
20. 20. Campbell DC, Johnson PD,
Williams JD, Rindsberg AK, Serb JM,
Small KK, et al. Identification of ’extinct’
freshwater mussel species using DNA
barcoding. Mol Ecol Resour. 2008;8(4):
711-24.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02108.x
21. Shufran KA, Puterka GJ. DNA barcoding to
identify all life stages of holocyclic cereal
aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) on Wheat
and Other Poaceae. Ann Entomol Soc Am.
2011;104(1):39-42.
DOI: 10.1603/AN10129
22. Javal M, Terblanche JS, Conlong DE,
Delahaye N, Grobbelaar E, Benoit L, et al.
DNA barcoding for bio-surveillance of
emerging pests and species identification
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
77
in Afrotropical Prioninae (Coleoptera,
Cerambycidae). Biodivers Data J. 2021;
9:e64499.
DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.9.e64499
23. Bryant PJ, Arehart T. Diversity and life-
cycle analysis of Pacific Ocean
Zooplankton by videomicroscopy and DNA
barcoding: gastropods. Diversity.
2022;14(11):912.
DOI: 10.3390/d14110912
24. Jackson AS, Nijman V. VDNA bar coding of
primates and the selection of molecular
markers using African Great Apes as a
model. J Anthropol Sci. 2020;98.
DOI: 10.4436/JASS.98017
25. Dentinger BT, Didukh MY, Moncalvo JM.
Comparing COI and its as DNA barcode
markers for mushrooms and allies
(Agaricomycotina). PLOS ONE.
2011;6(9):e25081.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025081
26. Kang Y, Deng Z, Zang R, Long W. DNA
bar-coding analysis and phylogenetic
relationships of tree species in tropical
cloud forests. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):12564.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-13057-0
27. Hebert PD, Stoeckle MY, Zemlak TS,
Francis CM. Identification of birds through
DNA barcodes. PLOS Biol. 2004;
2(10):e312.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0020312
28. Hajibabaei M, Singer GA, Hebert PD.
Hickey, D.A. DNA bar coding: How it
complements taxonomy, molecular
phylogenetics and population genetics.
Trends Genet TIG. 2007;23(4):167-72.
DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2007.02.001
29. Drescher L, Heng NJK, Chin MY, Karve
NRO, Cheung EJW, Kurniadi A, et al.
Blood in the water: DNA barcoding of
traded shark fins in Singapore. Front Mar
Sci. 2022;9.
DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2022.907714
30. Barcaccia G, Lucchin M, Cassandro
MDNA. Bar coding as a molecular tool to
track down mislabeling and food piracy.
Diversity. 2015;8(4):2.
DOI: 10.3390/d8010002
31. Galimberti A, De Mattia F, Losa A, Bruni I,
Federici S, Casiraghi M, et al. DNA
barcoding as a new tool for food
traceability. Food Res Int. 2013;50(1):
55-63.
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.09.036
32. Nehal N, Choudhary B, Nagpure A, Gupta
RK. DNA bar coding: A modern age tool for
detection of adulteration in food. Crit Rev
Biotechnol. 2021;41(5):767-91.
DOI: 10.1080/07388551.2021.1874279
33. Hellberg RS, Hernandez BC, Hernandez
EL. Identification of meat and poultry
species in food products using DNA
barcoding. Food Control. 2017;80:23-8.
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.04.025
34. Galimberti A, Labra M, Sandionigi A, Bruno
A, Mezzasalma V, De Mattia F. DNA bar
coding for minor crops and food
traceability. Adv Agric. 2014;2014:1-8.
DOI: 10.1155/2014/831875
35. de Vere N, Rich TC, Trinder SA. Long, C.
DNA bar coding for plants. Plant
genotyping. Methods Protoc. 2015:
101-18.
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-1966-6_8
36. Cooper JE, Cooper ME, Budgen P. Wildlife
crime scene investigation: techniques,
tools and technology. Endang Species
Res. 2009;9:229-38.
DOI: 10.3354/ESR00204
37. Kretser H, Stokes E, Wich S, Foran D,
Montefiore A. Technological innovations
supporting wildlife crime detection,
deterrence, and enforcement. Conserv
Criminol. 2017:155-77.
DOI: 10.1002/9781119376866.ch9
38. Liu Y, Xu C, Dong W, Yang X, Zhou S.
Determination of a criminal suspect using
environmental plant DNA metabarcoding
technology. Forensic Sci Int. 2021;
324:110828.
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2021.110828
39. Bell KL, Burgess KS, Okamoto KC, Aranda
R, Brosi BJ. Review and future prospects
for DNA barcoding methods in forensic
palynology. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2016;
21:110-6.
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.12.010
40. Chimeno C, Morinière J, Podhorna J,
Hardulak L, Hausmann A, Reckel F, et al.
DNA Barcoding in forensic entomology –
Establishing a DNA reference library of
potentially forensic relevant arthropod
species. J Forensic Sci. 2019;64(2):
593-601.
DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.13869
41. Liu J, Milne RI, Möller M, Zhu GF, Ye LJ,
Luo YH, et al. Integrating a comprehensive
DNA barcode reference library with a
global map of yews (Taxus L.) for forensic
identification. Mol Ecol Resour. 2018;
18(5):1115-31.
DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12903
Mampang et al.; Uttar Pradesh J. Zool., vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 69-78, 2023; Article no.UPJOZ.2782
78
42. Kress WJ. Plant DNA barcodes:
applications today and in the future. J Syst
Evol. 2017;55(4):291-307.
DOI: 10.1111/jse.12254
43. Staats M, Arulandhu AJ, Gravendeel B,
Holst-Jensen A, Scholtens I, Peelen T, et
al. Advances in DNA metabarcoding for
food and wildlife forensic species
identification. Anal Bioanal Chem.
2016;408(17):4615-30.
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-016-9595-8
44. Yang F, Ding F, Chen H, He M, Zhu S, Ma
X, et al. Bar coding for the identification
and authentication of animal species in
traditional medicine. Evid Based
Complement Alternat Med. 2018;2018:
5160254.
DOI: 10.1155/2018/5160254
45. Han J, Pang X, Liao B, Yao H, Song J,
Chen S. An authenticity survey of herbal
medicines from markets in China using
DNA barcoding. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):18723.
DOI: 10.1038/srep18723
46. Raskoti BB, Ale R. DNA bar coding of
medicinal orchids in Asia. Sci Rep.
2021;11(1):23651.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-03025-0
47. Moon BC, Kim WJ, Ji Y, Lee YM, Kang
YM, Choi G. Molecular identification of the
traditional herbal medicines, Arisaematis
rhizoma and Pinelliae Tuber, and common
adulterants via universal DNA barcode
sequences. Genet Mol Res. 2016;15(1).
DOI: 10.4238/gmr.15017064
48. Tnah LH, Lee SL, Tan AL, Lee CT, Ng
KKS, Ng CH, et al. DNA barcode database
of common herbal plants in the tropics: a
resource for herbal product authentication.
Food Control. 2019;95:318-26.
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.08.022
49. Ichim MC. The DNA-based authentication
of commercial herbal products reveals their
globally widespread adulteration. Front
Pharmacol. 2019;10:1227.
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.01227
50. Budaklar B, Sert B, Gülden G, Taştan C.
Development of DNA ink & DNA barcoding
technology on practical tracking &
authenticity detection of pharmaceutical
ingredients. Gene Edit. 2022;3(3):
19-29.
DOI: 10.29228/genediting.66978
51. Upton R, David B, Gafner S, Glasl S.
Botanical ingredient identification and
quality assessment: Strengths and
limitations of analytical techniques.
Phytochem Rev. 2020;19(5):1157-77.
DOI: 10.1007/s11101-019-09625-z
52. Staats M, Arulandhu AJ, Gravendeel B,
Holst-Jensen A, Scholtens I, Peelen T, et
al. Advances in DNA metabarcoding for
food and wildlife forensic species
identification. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2016;
408(17):4615-30.
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-016-9595-8
53. Moritz C, Cicero CDNA. Bar coding:
Promise and pitfalls. PLOS Biol.
2004;2(10):e354.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0020354
54. Besse P, Da Silva D, Grisoni M. Plant DNA
barcoding principles and limits: A case
study in the genus Vanilla. Methods Mol
Biol Molecular Plant Taxonomy. 2021;2222.
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-0997-2_8
© Copyright MB International Media and Publishing House. All rights reserved.
