DNA barcoding of southern African mammal species and construction of a reference library for forensic application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combating wildlife crimes in South Africa requires accurate identification of traded species and their products. Diagnostic morphological characteristics needed to identify species are often lost when specimens are processed and customs officials lack the expertise to identify species. As a potential solution, DNA barcoding can be used to identify morphologically indistinguishable specimens in forensic cases. However, barcoding is hindered by the reliance on comprehensive, validated DNA barcode reference databases, which are currently limited. To overcome this limitation, we constructed a barcode library of cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 and cytochrome b sequences for threatened and protected mammals exploited in southern Africa. Additionally, we included closely related or morphologically similar species and assessed the database’s ability to identify species accurately. Published southern African sequences were incorporated to estimate intraspecific and interspecific variation. Neighbor-joining trees successfully discriminated 94%–95% of the taxa. However, some widespread species exhibited high intraspecific distances (>2%), suggesting geographic sub-structuring or cryptic speciation. Lack of reliable published data prevented the unambiguous discrimination of certain species. This study highlights the efficacy of DNA barcoding in species identification, particularly for forensic applications. It also highlights the need for a taxonomic re-evaluation of certain widespread species and challenging genera.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".