[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Fwd: Animal 'bar codes' to take over from Latin names
Well, this should be fun for palaeontologists....
Animal 'bar codes' to take over from Latin names
By Roger Dobson, Independent.co.uk
March 9 2003
The names don't exactly trip off the tongue. But the official Latin
monikers used to catalogue the world's animal species are about to be
replaced with the sort of bar code normally seen on a baked bean tin.
For the past two and a half centuries, scientists examining new species
have allocated them to the right family with a description based on a
Latin root making sure, of course, not to confuse an Arbitrarus
conventicus with a Revisionus conventicus and also carefully catalogued
them according to their appearance.
But there are fewer and fewer people able to do this work, and it is also
painfully slow. Over the past 250 years, only a modest 1.2 million species
have been described and named. With an estimated 10 million animal species
still to be recorded, there are fears that many could disappear before
they are properly catalogued.
Today 40 leading scientists involved in taxonomy the classification of
organisms will meet in New York with the aim of setting up an
international bar-coding system using individual DNA as labels for new
species. Existing species will get their own bar code, too.
With the right technology, says a report co-authored by scientists at the
Natural History Museum, in London, up to 1,000 species a day could be bar
coded by just one institution. And that, say scientists, will make it
possible to catalogue animal life on the planet within two decades, 1,000
or so years sooner than under the current system.
Scientists say that the retail industry's coding system employs 10 digits
to create 100 billion different combinations, or bar codes, that are in
turn allocated to specific products ranging from canned beans to electronics.
DNA is also encoded, using four chemical bases adenine (A), cytosine
(C), guanine (G) and thymine (T) and the genomes of most species are
millions of these nucleotides long. The sequence for every living organism
is different, and just using a fraction of the sequence would provide more
than one billion bar code options.
Although new species may have a bar code only, existing species will keep
their Latin names too. The bar code for an African elephant (Loxodonta
africana), for example, would be made up of thick and thin lines
representing the four chemical bases using the letters
AACACTGTATCTATTATTTG, while the domestic cat would be TACTCTTTACCTTTTATTCG.
"The proper naming of species has become a serious bottleneck," says
Professor Paul Hebert, of the University of Guelph, in Canada, who will be
at today's meeting. "I do think it is a serious problem, and I believe the
move to DNA-based taxonomy will lead to a new approach to the description
of species. After the bar coding, those who then want to name and describe
species can come along over the next 2,000 years or so because that's
how long it would take and do so. What we are saying is that there is a
need to bring modern technology to the task of species recognition. We
also suggest that nature has been kind enough to embed every life form
with a 'bar code' and all we need to do is read it."
Dr Richard Thomas, of the Natural History Museum, and co-author of a
report published this week in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, said: "We
think DNA will be very useful for groups of species that have a lot of
diversity in them. With the use of DNA, a species could be described and
catalogued. Some groups suggest that a DNA bar code would be sufficient,
but I believe that we would still want to come back and name them,
possibly at a later date.
"Another advantage of bar codes is that the information is digital and not
influenced by subjective assessments. It would be reproducible at any time
and by any person, speaking any language."
The report reveals the speed with which bar coding illustrated above in
mock-up form for a polar bear and an African elephant could be done.
The report states: "Establishment of a DNA facility that could routinely
handle 1,000 samples per day would cost approximately as much as a
facility that runs a transmission and a scanning electron microscope. The
material costs for each sample, including DNA extraction and sequencing of
two independent regions, would be five euros per sample."
Just what Darwin would make of it is not clear, but Dr Thomas believes he
would be in favour: "I think he would really love it," he said.
For further information on elephants please see Save the Elephants' web
site at http://www.savetheelephants.org
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
Ronald I. Orenstein Phone: (905) 820-7886
International Wildlife Coalition Fax/Modem: (905) 569-0116
1825 Shady Creek Court
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 3W2 mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org