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 Andrena variabilis has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens17
BINs1
Marker genes2
eDNA detections4
Countries5
The DNA barcodethe species' typical barcode, built from every sequenced specimen
COI-5P658 bp consensus7 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. 100% of positions are identical in every specimen.
Diversity (π)0.04%
Haplotypes1
BIN1
Where individuals differ — all 1 variable positions, in barcode order
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-5P16S
animal barcoderibosomal
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type300 records
Wild obs. + sensor115
Museum / vouchered145
Other40
Origin
Native8
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO548 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 accuracy55% within 1 km
≤100 m 27≤1 km 9≤10 km 25>10 km 5
66 georeferenced · 49 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor115
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 accuracy32% within 1 km
≤1 km 24≤10 km 43>10 km 7
74 georeferenced · 71 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence145
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 institutions7 of 10 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Zürich, CH
45
Wuzhou, CN
37
17
Coimbra, PT
8
Philadelphia, US
6
Cambridge, US
5
Provincia di Livornolocation not on record
2
Institute of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Research, Bulgarian Academy of Scienceslocation not on record
2
ENSAT - L'Ecole Nationale Superieure Agronomique de Toulouselocation not on record
1
Champaign, US
1
10 institutions · 124 of 145 vouchered records shown · 21 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA4 detections
Where the DNA of Andrena variabilis 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 found4
Studies independent surveys1
Countries1
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 4 detections have coordinates
Open the map1 country0
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 median15.0 °C 15.0–15.0
Seasonal swing summer↔winter15.5 °C
Max temp (day)19.1 °C
Min temp (night)9.90 °C
Precipitation91.5 mm/mo
Air humidity60.6 %
Moisture balance-29.8 mm/mo
Vapour deficit673 Pa
Wind speed3.40 m/s
Cloud cover42.3 %
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 1 detection point · 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.
