In 2003, two different approaches-DNA taxonomy and DNA barcoding-were simultaneously proposed to overcome some of the perceived intrinsic weaknesses of the traditional morphology-based taxonomical system, and to help non-taxonomists to resolve their crucial need for accurate and rapid species identification tools. After 7 years, it seems unlikely that a completely new taxonomical system based on molecular characters only (DNA taxonomy) will develop in the future. It is more likely that both morphological and molecular data will be simultaneously analyzed, developing what has been coined as "integrative taxonomy". Concerning DNA barcoding, it is now clear that it does not focus on building a tree-of-life nor to perform DNA taxonomy, but rather to produce a universal molecular identification key based on strong taxonomic knowledge that is collated in the barcode reference library. The indisputable success of the DNA barcoding project is chiefly due to the fact that DNA barcoding standards considerably enhance current practices in the molecular identification field, and standardization offers virtually endless applications for various users.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fabrice Teletchea (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: