DNA barcoding of the National Museum of Natural History reptile tissue holdings raises concerns about the use of natural history collections and the responsibilities of scientists in the molecular age

Natural history collections are essential to a wide variety of studies in biology because they maintain large collections of specimens and associated data, including genetic material (e.g., tissues) for DNA sequence data, yet they are currently under-funded and collection staff have high workloads. With the advent of aggregate databases and advances in sequencing technologies, there is an increased demand on collection staff for access to tissue samples and associated data. Scientists are rapidly developing large DNA barcode libraries, DNA sequences of specific genes for species across the tree of life, in order to document and conserve biodiversity. In doing so, mistakes are made. For instance, inconsistent taxonomic information is commonly taken from different lending institutions and deposited in data repositories, such as the Barcode of Life Database (BOLD) and GenBank, despite explicit disclaimers regarding the need for taxonomic verification by the lending institutions. Such errors can have profound effects on subsequent research based on these mis-labelled sequences in data repositories. Here, we present the production of a large DNA barcode library of reptiles from the National Museum of Natural History tissue holdings. The library contains 2,758 sequences (2,205 COI and 553 16S) from 2260 specimens (four crocodilians, 37 turtles, and 2,219 lizards, including snakes), representing 583 named species, from 52 countries. In generating this library, we noticed several common mistakes made by scientists depositing DNA barcode data in public repositories (e.g., BOLD and GenBank). Our goal is to raise awareness of these concerns and offer advice to avoid such mistakes in the future to maintain accurate DNA barcode libraries to properly document Earth’s biodiversity.

[1]  A. Bauer,et al.  How the African house gecko (Hemidactylus mabouia) conquered the world , 2021, Royal Society Open Science.

[2]  L. Vitt,et al.  Not withering on the evolutionary vine: systematic revision of the Brown Vine Snake (Reptilia: Squamata: Oxybelis) from its northern distribution , 2020, Organisms Diversity & Evolution.

[3]  M. Sabaj Codes for Natural History Collections in Ichthyology and Herpetology , 2020, Copeia.

[4]  P. Moehlman,et al.  Consequences of the misidentification of museum specimens: the taxonomic status of Canis lupaster soudanicus , 2020, Journal of Mammalogy.

[5]  Christiane Quaisser,et al.  Managing Natural Science Collections: A Guide to Strategy, Planning and Resourcing , 2020 .

[6]  William D. Flint,et al.  The Type Locality Project: collecting genomic-quality, topotypic vouchers and training the next generation of specimen-based researchers , 2020, Systematics and Biodiversity.

[7]  F. Glöckner,et al.  Repositories for Taxonomic Data: Where We Are and What is Missing , 2020, Systematic biology.

[8]  Alexis S. Harrison,et al.  Phylogeographic and phenotypic outcomes of brown anole colonization across the Caribbean provide insight into the beginning stages of an adaptive radiation , 2019, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[9]  N. Knowlton,et al.  GenBank is a reliable resource for 21st century biodiversity research , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Emily K. Meineke,et al.  Digitization and the Future of Natural History Collections , 2019, BioScience.

[11]  Kelly A Meiklejohn,et al.  Assessment of BOLD and GenBank – Their accuracy and reliability for the identification of biological materials , 2019, PloS one.

[12]  Travis J. LaDuc,et al.  Phylogenetic structure of Holbrookia lacerata (Cope 1880) (Squamata: Phrynosomatidae): one species or two? , 2019, Zootaxa.

[13]  João C. L. Costa,et al.  Taxonomic revision of the Erythrolamprus reginae species group, with description of a new species from Guiana Shield (Serpentes: Xenodontinae). , 2019, Zootaxa.

[14]  A. Kury,et al.  Immolation of Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro – unforgettable fire and irreplaceable loss , 2018, Journal of Arachnology.

[15]  J. Trape,et al.  Integration of nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences and morphology reveals unexpected diversity in the forest cobra (Naja melanoleuca) species complex in Central and West Africa (Serpentes: Elapidae). , 2018, Zootaxa.

[16]  G. Zug,et al.  Filling the BINs of life: Report of an amphibian and reptile survey of the Tanintharyi (Tenasserim) Region of Myanmar, with DNA barcode data , 2018, ZooKeys.

[17]  Ilene Karsch-Mizrachi,et al.  The NCBI BioCollections Database , 2018, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[18]  C. Parkinson,et al.  Phylogeography of the Central American lancehead Bothrops asper (SERPENTES: VIPERIDAE) , 2017, PloS one.

[19]  J. Deichmann,et al.  How many species and under what names? Using DNA barcoding and GenBank data for west Central African amphibian conservation , 2017, PloS one.

[20]  E. A. Myers,et al.  Coalescent Species Tree Inference of Coluber and Masticophis , 2017, Copeia.

[21]  K. de Queiroz,et al.  A Phylogenetic, Biogeographic, and Taxonomic study of all Extant Species of Anolis (Squamata; Iguanidae) , 2017, Systematic biology.

[22]  Vincent S. Smith,et al.  Actionable, long-term stable and semantic web compatible identifiers for access to biological collection objects , 2017, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[23]  G. Zug,et al.  Resurrection of Bronchocela burmana Blanford, 1878 for the Green Crested Lizard (Squamata, Agamidae) of southern Myanmar , 2017, ZooKeys.

[24]  N. Muangmai,et al.  Assessment of snake DNA barcodes based on mitochondrial COI and Cytb genes revealed multiple putative cryptic species in Thailand. , 2016, Gene.

[25]  Tahani Nadim,et al.  Data Labours: How the Sequence Databases GenBank and EMBL-Bank Make Data , 2016 .

[26]  P. Hebert,et al.  Assessing DNA Barcodes for Species Identification in North American Reptiles and Amphibians in Natural History Collections , 2016, PloS one.

[27]  C. Moritz,et al.  Deep divergence and structure in the Tropical Oceanic Pacific: a multilocus phylogeography of a widespread gekkonid lizard (Squamata: Gekkonidae: Gehyra oceanica) , 2016 .

[28]  J. McGuire,et al.  Fixing Formalin: A Method to Recover Genomic-Scale DNA Sequence Data from Formalin-Fixed Museum Specimens Using High-Throughput Sequencing , 2015, PloS one.

[29]  G. Köhler,et al.  Anolis marsupialis Taylor 1956, a valid species from southern Pacific Costa Rica (Reptilia, Squamata, Dactyloidae). , 2015, Zootaxa.

[30]  G. Köhler,et al.  A revision of the Mexican Anolis (Reptilia, Squamata, Dactyloidae) from the Pacific versant west of the Isthmus de Tehuantepec in the states of Oaxaca, Guerrero, and Puebla, with the description of six new species . , 2014, Zootaxa.

[31]  U. Fritz,et al.  On the reclassification of box turtles (Terrapene): A response to Martin et al. (2014). , 2014, Zootaxa.

[32]  R. C. Thomson,et al.  Multilocus phylogeny of the New-World mud turtles (Kinosternidae) supports the traditional classification of the group. , 2014, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[33]  D. R. Robertson,et al.  Specimen collection: an essential tool. , 2014, Science.

[34]  Alexandros Stamatakis,et al.  RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies , 2014, Bioinform..

[35]  Z. Nagy,et al.  Reliable DNA Barcoding Performance Proved for Species and Island Populations of Comoran Squamate Reptiles , 2013, PloS one.

[36]  A. Bauer,et al.  A new species of lizard in the genus Caledoniscincus (Reptilia: Scincidae) from southern New Caledonia and a review of Caledoniscincus atropunctatus (Roux). , 2013, Zootaxa.

[37]  Sujeevan Ratnasingham,et al.  A DNA-Based Registry for All Animal Species: The Barcode Index Number (BIN) System , 2013, PloS one.

[38]  Steven M. Mussmann,et al.  Sequence-based molecular phylogenetics and phylogeography of the American box turtles (Terrapene spp.) with support from DNA barcoding. , 2013, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[39]  J. L. Carr,et al.  Complex phylogeography in Rhinoclemmys melanosterna: conflicting mitochondrial and nuclear evidence suggests past hybridization (Testudines: Geoemydidae). , 2013, Zootaxa.

[40]  Charles W. Linkem,et al.  Stochastic faunal exchanges drive diversification in widespread Wallacean and Pacific island lizards (Squamata: Scincidae: Lamprolepis smaragdina) , 2013 .

[41]  A. Bauer,et al.  Evolution of gliding in Southeast Asian geckos and other vertebrates is temporally congruent with dipterocarp forest development , 2012, Biology Letters.

[42]  J. Losos,et al.  Out of Florida: mtDNA reveals patterns of migration and Pleistocene range expansion of the Green Anole lizard (Anolis carolinensis) , 2012, Ecology and evolution.

[43]  G. Zug,et al.  A preliminary assessment of the Nactus pelagicus species group (Squamata: Gekkonidae) in New Guinea and a new species from the Admiralty Islands , 2012 .

[44]  W. Böhme,et al.  Studies on the taxonomy of the Gekko vittatus Houttuyn, 1782 complex (Squamata: Gekkonidae) I. On the variability of G. vittatus Houttuyn, 1782 sensu lato, with the description of a new species from Palau Islands, Micronesia , 2012 .

[45]  A. Driskell,et al.  DNA barcoding fishes. , 2012, Methods in molecular biology.

[46]  D. Harris,et al.  On the diversity, colonization patterns and status of Hemidactylus spp. (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) from the Western Indian Ocean islands , 2010 .

[47]  Caitlin A. Kuczynski,et al.  Phylogenetic relationships of phrynosomatid lizards based on nuclear and mitochondrial data, and a revised phylogeny for Sceloporus. , 2010, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[48]  Aurélien Miralles,et al.  The integrative future of taxonomy , 2010, Frontiers in Zoology.

[49]  U. Jondelius,et al.  Phylogenies without roots? A plea for the use of vouchers in molecular phylogenetic studies. , 2008, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[50]  K. de Queiroz,et al.  Phylogenetic relationships and heterogeneous evolutionary processes among phrynosomatine sand lizards (Squamata, Iguanidae) revisited. , 2008, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[51]  A. Leaché,et al.  Hybridization between multiple fence lizard lineages in an ecotone: locally discordant variation in mitochondrial DNA, chromosomes, and morphology , 2006, Molecular ecology.

[52]  S. Carranza,et al.  Systematics, biogeography, and evolution of Hemidactylus geckos (Reptilia: Gekkonidae) elucidated using mitochondrial DNA sequences. , 2006, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[53]  J. Losos,et al.  Out of Cuba: overwater dispersal and speciation among lizards in the Anolis carolinensis subgroup , 2005, Molecular ecology.

[54]  D. Harris,et al.  Diversity and phylogenetic relationships of Hemidactylus geckos from the Comoro islands. , 2005, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[55]  A. Meyer,et al.  Natural colonization or introduction? Phylogeographical relationships and morphological differentiation of house geckos (Hemidactylus) from Madagascar , 2004 .

[56]  D. Wake,et al.  Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico: Update , 2003 .

[57]  Jeremy R. deWaard,et al.  Biological identifications through DNA barcodes , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[58]  T. Reeder,et al.  Phylogenetic Relationships of Whiptail Lizards of the Genus Cnemidophorus (Squamata: Teiidae): A Test of Monophyly, Reevaluation of Karyotypic Evolution, and Review of Hybrid Origins , 2002 .

[59]  A. Leaché,et al.  Molecular systematics of the Eastern Fence Lizard (Sceloporus undulatus): a comparison of Parsimony, Likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. , 2002, Systematic biology.

[60]  J. Wilgenbusch,et al.  Phylogenetic relationships among the phrynosomatid sand lizards inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences generated by heterogeneous evolutionary processes. , 2000, Systematic biology.

[61]  C. Austin,et al.  Molecular Phylogeny and Historical Biogeography of Pacific Island Boas (Candoia) , 2000, Copeia.

[62]  J. Rodríguez-Robles,et al.  Molecular systematics of new world gopher, bull, and pinesnakes (Pituophis: Colubridae), a transcontinental species complex. , 2000, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[63]  G. Pregill,et al.  A Checklist of the Herpetofauna of the Palau Islands (Republic of Belau), Oceania , 1999 .

[64]  C. Austin Lizards took express train to Polynesia , 1999, Nature.

[65]  G. Zug,et al.  Striped Skinks in Oceania: The Status of Emoia caeruleocauda in Fiji , 1997 .

[66]  S. Boissinot,et al.  Hybrid origin and clonal diversity in the parthenogenetic gecko, Lepidodactylus lugubris in French Polynesia , 1997 .

[67]  C. Moritz,et al.  When species collide: the origin and spread of an asexual species of gecko , 1995, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[68]  Uetz Peter,et al.  The Reptile Database , 1995 .

[69]  C. Moritz,et al.  Genetic diversity and the history of pacific island house geckos (Hemidactylus and Lepidodactylus) , 1993 .

[70]  E. Yochelson,et al.  The National Museum of Natural History , 1985 .

[71]  S. B. Mcdowell,et al.  A Catalogue of the Snakes of New Guinea and the Solomons, with Special Reference to Those in the Bernice P. Bishop Museum. Part III. Boinae and Acrochordoidea (Reptilia, Serpentes) , 1979 .

[72]  T. Barbour A new lizard from Guaymas, Mexico , 1921 .

[73]  Philip Kopper,et al.  The National Museum of Natural History , 1898, Nature.

[74]  A. Duméril Études sur les reptiles , 1870 .