A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Aegomorphus clavipes has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens31
BINs8
Marker genes2
eDNA detections7
Countries8
The DNA barcodethe species' typical barcode, built from every sequenced specimen
COI-5P658 bp consensus18 specimens
ACGT
▸ drag or hover over the strip to read any position — letter and how much it varies
Violet ticks below the strip = positions where individuals differ; flat = the species' unchanging signature. 90% of positions are identical in every specimen.
Where individuals differ — all 63 variable positions, in barcode order
Each circle is a barcode variant; bigger = more specimens, colour = region. Lines join the most similar variants and the tick marks count the mutations between them — a tight cluster is one “dialect”, a long line a more divergent lineage. Click a circle to list its actual specimens.
Diversity (π)2.8%
Haplotypes13
BINs8
Most divergent pair5.0%
EuropeOther
Closest relatives by DNA barcode
The species whose COI barcode is most similar to this one — a quick “who is this most like”. The percentage is how much the barcode differs; it approximates, but is not, the full evolutionary tree.
★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.
★COI-3P★COI-5P
animal barcode
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type5 071 records
Wild obs. + sensor3 474
Museum / vouchered1 346
Other251
Origin
Native403
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO10 216 km²
Wildobservation + sensor
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
Coordinate accuracy57% within 1 km
≤100 m 1 245≤1 km 496≤10 km 1 249>10 km 85
3 075 georeferenced · 399 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor3 474
Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence
Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.
Coordinate accuracy26% within 1 km
≤100 m 96≤1 km 203≤10 km 838>10 km 21
1 158 georeferenced · 188 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1 346
Wildobservation + sensor
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
10Collections & institutions
Holding institutions21 of 50 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
SLU Artdatabankenlocation not on record
212
Muzeum Górnośląskie w Bytomiulocation not on record
85
Bern, CH
76
Paro, BT
76
NHMOlocation not on record
57
Geneva, CH
43
Musee d'Histoire Naturallelocation not on record
41
Naturéum — Muséum cantonal des sciences naturelles, Lausanne, Département Zoologielocation not on record
40
Helsinki, FI
32
Dhaka, BD
32
Tallinn, EE
31
Museo civico di Storia naturale Giacomo Doria di Genova | Giacomo Doria Natural History Museum in Genoalocation not on record
30
Fribourg, CH
29
Stockholm, SE
25
NTNU-VMlocation not on record
23
Zürich, CH
21
Tartu, EE
18
Jyväskylä, FI
17
Trondheim, NO
14
Nijmegen, NL
12
Museum Ludovicae Ulricae, Zoology Institute of the University of Uppsalalocation not on record
10
BioFokuslocation not on record
10
Paris, FR
8
Salzburg, AT
8
MZLUlocation not on record
5
University of Oulu, Zoological Museumlocation not on record
4
Metsähallituslocation not on record
4
MSNMlocation not on record
4
South Kensington, GB
2
Naturmuseum Oltenlocation not on record
2
Frauenfeld, CH
2
Oulu, FI
2
NMBU:MINAlocation not on record
2
Musée de l'Hospice du Grand-Saint-Bernardlocation not on record
2
Bavarian State Collection of Zoologylocation not on record
2
Vitoria, ES
2
Research Collection of Jussi Vilenlocation not on record
2
Sion, CH
2
neflocation not on record
2
Provincia di Livornolocation not on record
2
TMPMlocation not on record
2
NMOKlocation not on record
2
Private Collection of Dominik Rabllocation not on record
1
Department of Molecular Biodiversity, Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals of the Polish Academy of Scienceslocation not on record
1
IFR-DNFlocation not on record
1
Naturmuseum Solothurnlocation not on record
1
Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodeslocation not on record
1
RCMlocation not on record
1
ZMAAlocation not on record
1
Kuopio, FI
1
50 institutions · 1 003 of 1 346 vouchered records shown · 343 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA7 detections
Where the DNA of Aegomorphus clavipes was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.
Signal
Detections DNA found7
Studies independent surveys1
Countries4
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 7 detections have coordinates
Open the map4 countries0
Forest
How strong is each trace?
DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.
Modelled climatemodelled
−15°Ctemperature across detection sites+40°C
Temperature median15.2 °C 11.1–17.7
Seasonal swing summer↔winter23.4 °C
Max temp (day)19.0 °C 14.6–21.0
Min temp (night)10.9 °C 6.90–13.6
Precipitation76.5 mm/mo 58.2–140
Air humidity59.4 % 57.8–63.4
Moisture balance-24.7 mm/mo -46.4–26.4
Vapour deficit738 Pa 538–826
Wind speed2.70 m/s 2.40–3.60
Cloud cover44.5 % 35.0–45.4
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 6 detection points · median with p10–p90 · reflects where sampling happened, not only the true niche
How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.