Advertisement

Theory in Biosciences

, Volume 129, Issue 2–3, pp 149–157 | Cite as

New insights into molecular evolution: prospects from the Barcode of Life Initiative (BOLI)

  • Filipe O. CostaEmail author
  • Gary R. Carvalho
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

Geographic and temporal patterns of morphological and behavioral diversifications among species stimulated Darwin to propose a mechanism for evolutionary change through natural selection. Scientific developments have revealed an even more fundamental level of biological complexity: sequence variation in DNA. While genome projects yield spectacular insights into molecular evolution, they have targeted only a few species. In contrast, the Barcode of Life Initiative (BOLI) proposes a horizontal approach to genomics, examining short, standardized genome segments across the sweep of eukaryotic life, all 10 million species. BOLI will extend our understanding of evolution and speciation in varied ways. It will facilitate quantification of biological diversity by disclosing cryptic species and enabling a rapid survey of taxon diversity in groups that have hitherto received scant morphological examination. It will facilitate assignment of life history stages to known species and provide a first estimate of species ages. It will also reveal key features of the mitochondrial genome, because the evolutionary properties of barcodes relate to those in the mitochondrial genome as a whole, acting to flag taxonomic groups or species with unusual nucleotide composition or evolutionary rates. The growing volume of barcode records has revealed that sequence variability within species is generally much lower than divergence among species (barcoding gap), a pattern that occurs in diverse lineages, suggesting a pervasive evolutionary process. Low variability may reflect recurrent selective sweeps of favored mitochondrial variants propagating as single linkage units across species. If this hypothesis is substantiated, the implications are significant, particularly for our understanding of molecular evolution of mitochondrial DNA and its relationship with species delineation.

Keywords

DNA barcoding Molecular evolution Cryptic species Substitution rates Selective sweeps 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

F.O. Costa work was supported by grants from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (PTDC/MAR/69892/2006) and from European Commission reference (PERG02-GA-2007-224890).

References

  1. Albu M, Min XJ, Hickey D, Golding B (2008) Uncorrected nucleotide bias in mtDNA can mimic the effects of positive Darwinian selection. Mol Biol Evol 25:2521–2524. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msn224 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Avise JC, Walker D (1999) Species realities and numbers in sexual vertebrates: perspectives from an asexually transmitted genome. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:992–995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazin E, Glémin S, Galtier N (2006) Population size does not influence mitochondrial genetic diversity in animals. Science 312:570–572. doi: 10.1126/science.1122033 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Borisenko AV, Lim BK, Ivanova NV, Hanner RH, Hebert PDN (2008) DNA barcoding in surveys of small mammal communities: a field study in Suriname. Mol Ecol Notes 8:471–479. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01998.x Google Scholar
  5. CBOL Plant Working Group (2009) A DNA barcode for land plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:12794–12797. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0905845106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clare EL, Kerr CR, von Königslöw TE, Wilson JJ, Hebert PDN (2008) Diagnosing mitochondrial DNA diversity: applications of a sentinel gene approach. Mol Ecol Res 66:362–367. doi: 10.1007/s00239-008-9088-2 Google Scholar
  7. Collins FS, Morgaa M, Patrinos A (2003) The human genome project: lessons from large-scale biology. Science 300:286–290. doi: 10.1126/science.1084564 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Costa FO, Carvalho GR (2007) The Barcode of Life Initiative: synopsis and prospective societal impacts of DNA barcoding of fish. Genomics Soc Policy 3:29–40Google Scholar
  9. Costa FO, deWaard JR, Boutillier J, Ratnasingham S, Dooh R, Hajibabaei M, Hebert PDN (2007) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes: the case of the Crustacea. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 64:272–295. doi: 10.1139/F07-008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Costa FO, Henzler CM, Lunt DH, Whiteley N, Rock J (2009) Probing marine Gammarus (Amphipoda) taxonomy with DNA barcodes. Syst Biodivers 7:365–379. doi: 10.1017/S1477200009990120 Google Scholar
  11. Dowling DK, Friberg U, Lindell J (2008) Evolutionary implications of non-neutral mitochondrial genetic variation. Trends Ecol Evol 23:546–554. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2008.05.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Erpenbeck D, Hooper JNA, Wörheide G (2006) CO1 phylogenies in diploblasts and the ‘Barcoding of Life’—are we sequencing a suboptimal partition? Mol Ecol Notes 6:550–553. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.02159.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Felsenstein J (1978) Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst Zool 27:401–410. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/27.4.401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frézal L, Leblois R (2008) Four years of DNA barcoding: current advances and prospects. Infect Genet Evol 8:727–736. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2008.05.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedberg EC, Walker GC, Siede W (1995) DNA repair and mutagenesis. ASM Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Frose R, Pauly D (eds) (2009) FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org. Accessed 1 Aug 2009
  17. Gaston KJ (2000) Global patterns in biodiversity. Nature 405:220–227. doi: 10.1038/35012228 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gaston KJ (2006) The structure and dynamics of geographic ranges. Oxford Series in Ecology and Evolution. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Gómez A, Wright PJ, Lunt DH, Cancino JM, Carvalho GR, Hughes RN (2007) Mating trials validate the use of DNA barcoding to reveal cryptic speciation of a marine bryozoan taxon. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:199–207. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3718 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hajibabaei M, Janzen DH, Burns JM, Hallwachs W, Hebert PDN (2006) DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:968–971. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510466103 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Clare EL, Hebert PDN (2007) Design and applicability of DNA arrays and DNA barcodes in biodiversity monitoring. BMC Biol 5:24. doi: 10.1186/1741-7007-5-24 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hassanin A (2006) Phylogeny of Arthropoda inferred from mitochondrial sequences: strategies for limiting the misleading effects of multiple changes in patterns and rates of substitution. Mol Phylogenet Evol 38:100–116. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2005.09.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hebert PDN, Remigio EA, Colbourne JK, Taylor DJ, Wilson CC (2002) Accelerated molecular evolution in halophilic crustaceans. Evolution 56:909–926. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2002.tb01404.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard JR (2003a) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:313–321. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hebert PDN, Ratnasingham S, deWaard JR (2003b) Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:596–599. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hebert PDN, Penton EH, Burns J, Janzen DH, Hallwachs W (2004) Ten species in one: DNA barcoding reveals cryptic species in the neotropical skipper butterfly Astraptes fulgerator. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:14812–14817. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0406166101 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Ho SYW (2009) An examination of phylogenetic models of substitution rate variation among lineages. Biol Lett 5:421–424. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0729 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Isaac NJB, Mallet J, Mace GM (2004) Taxonomic inflation: its influence on macroecology and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 19:464–469. doi: 0.1016/j.tree.2004.06.004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kerr KCR, Stoeckle CJ, Dove LA, Weigt CM, Francis HebertPDN (2007) Comprehensive DNA barcode coverage of North American birds. Mol Ecol Notes 7:535–543. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01670.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Koutroumpa FA, Lieutier F, Roux-Morabito G (2009) Incorporation of mitochondrial fragments in the nuclear genome (Numts) of the longhorned beetle Monochamus galloprovincialis (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae). J Zool Syst Evol Res 47:141–148. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0469.2008.00492.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lin HC, Sanchez-Ortiz C, Hastings PA (2009) Colour variation is incongruent with mitochondrial lineages: cryptic speciation and subsequent diversification in a Gulf of California reef fish (Teleostei: Blennioidei). Mol Ecol 18:2476–2488. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04188.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Lukhtanov VA, Sourakov A, Zakharov EV, Hebert PDN (2009) DNA barcoding Central Asian butterflies: increasing geographical dimension does not significantly reduce the success of species identification. Mol Ecol Res 9:1302–1310. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02577.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Min XJ, Hickey DA (2007) DNA barcodes provide a quick preview of mitochondrial genome composition. PLoS One 2:e325. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000325 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Moritz C, Cicero C (2004) DNA barcoding: promise and pitfalls. PLoS Biol 2:1529–1531. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0020354 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mulligan CJ, Kitchen A, Miyamoto MM (2006) Comment on “Population size does not influence mitochondrial genetic diversity in animals”. Science 314:1390a. doi: 10.1126/science.1132585 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nei M (2005) Selectionism and neutralism in molecular evolution. Mol Biol Evol 22:2318–2342. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msk009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Nilsson RH, Kristiansson E, Ryberg M, Hallenberg N, Larsson K-H (2008) Intraspecific ITS variability in the Kingdom Fungi as expressed in the International Sequence Databases and its implications for molecular species identification. Evol Bioinf 4:193–201Google Scholar
  38. Pfenninger M, Schwenk K (2007) Cryptic animal species animal species are homogeneously distributed among taxa and biogeographical regions. BMC Evol Biol 7:121. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-7-121 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Purves DW (2009) The demography of range boundaries versus range cores in eastern US tree species. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:1477–1484. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2008.1241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sáez AG, Lozano E (2005) Body doubles. Nature 433:111. doi: 10.1038/433111a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Savolainen V, Cowan RS, Vogler AP, Roderick GK, Lane R (2005) Towards writing the encyclopaedia of life: an introduction to DNA barcoding. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 360:1803–1980. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1730 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith MA, Poyarkov NA, Hebert PDN (2008) CO1 DNA barcoding amphibians: take the chance, meet the challenge. Mol Ecol Res 8:235–246. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01964.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spooner DM (2009) DNA barcoding will frequently fail in complicated groups: an example in wild potatoes. Am J Bot 96:1177–1189. doi: 10.3732/ajb.0800246 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Theißen G (2009) Saltational evolution: hopeful monsters are here to stay. Theory Biosci 128:43–51. doi: 10.1007/s12064-009-0058-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Thomas JA, Welch JJ, Woolfit M, Bromham L (2006) There is no universal molecular clock for invertebrates, but rate variation does not scale with body size. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:7366–7371. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510261103 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Valentini A, Pompanon F, Taberlet P (2008) DNA barcoding for ecologists. Trends Ecol Evol 24:110–117. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2008.09.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Vences M, Thomas M, Bonett RM, Vieites DR (2005) Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: chances and challenges. Phil Trans R Soc B 360:1859–1868. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1717 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Ward RD (2009) DNA barcode divergence among species and genera of birds and fishes. Mol Ecol Res 9:1077–1085. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02541.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ward RD, Costa FO, Holmes BH, Steinke D (2008) DNA barcoding shared fish species from the North Atlantic and Australasia: minimal divergence for most taxa, but Zeus faber and Lepidopus caudatus each probably constitute two species. Aquat Biol 3:71–78. doi: 10.3354/ab00068 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ward RD, Hanner R, Hebert PDN (2009) The campaign to DNA barcode all fishes, FISH-BOL. J Fish Biol 74:329–356. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2008.02080.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wares JP, Pringle JM (2008) Drift by drift: effective population size is limited by advection. BMC Evol Biol 8:235. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-8-235 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Wares JP, Barber PH, Ross-Ibarra J, Sotka EE, Toonen RJ (2006) Mitochondrial DNA and population size. Science 314:1388–1389CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Waugh J (2007) DNA barcoding in animal species: progress, potential and pitfalls. BioEssays 29:188–197. doi: 10.1002/bies.20529 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Zakharov EV, Lobo NF, Nowak C, Hellmann JJ (2009) Introgression as a likely cause of mtDNA paraphyly in two allopatric skippers (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Heredity 102:590–599. doi: 10.1038/hdy.2009.26 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Zemlak TS, Ward RD, Connell AD, Holmes BH, Hebert PDN (2009) DNA barcoding reveals overlooked marine fishes. Mol Ecol Res 9:237–242. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02649.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre of Molecular and Environmental Biology (CBMA), Department of BiologyUniversity of MinhoBragaPortugal
  2. 2.Molecular Ecology and Fisheries Genetics Laboratory (MEFGL), School of Biological SciencesBangor University, Environment Centre Wales, BangorBangorUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options