Get access

Are BOLD searches scientific? A response to Federhen (2011)

Authors

  • CRAIG D. MILLAR,

    1. Allan Wilson Centre for Molecular Ecology and Evolution, School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author
  • JOHN WAUGH,

    1. Allan Wilson Centre for Molecular Ecology and Evolution, Institute of Natural Sciences, Massey University, Private Bag 102 904, NSMC, Auckland, New Zealand
    Search for more papers by this author
  • DAVID M. LAMBERT

    1. Griffith School of Environment and School of Biomolecular and Physical Sciences, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Qld 4111, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author

David M. Lambert, Fax: +61 7 373 57459; E-mail: d.lambert@griffith.edu.au

Abstract

In 2011 Waugh et al. presented the results of a DNA barcoding study that identified avian species involved in birdstrikes. Federhen (2011) criticised this study by suggesting that some of the sequences on which identifications were based were not publicly available because access to them in the Barcode of Life database was restricted. Hence, according to Federhen (2011) the study is not repeatable. We disagree and discuss the role of databases in DNA barcoding generally.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary