Chamaedorea tepejilote, également connu sous le nom de palmier pacaya, est une espèce de palmier du genre Chamaedorea que l'on trouve dans le sous-bois des forêts tropicales du sud du Mexique, de l'Amérique centrale et du nord de la Colombie.
No narrative description available for this taxon yet.
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 Chamaedorea tepejilote has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens31
Marker genes5
GenBank sequences10
eDNA detections14
Countries2
The DNA barcodea real sequence read deposited for this species
★ 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.
★matK4★rbcL3★rbcLa★ITS3★ITS2
plant barcodefungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceCCDB · GoaT · NCBI
The complete instruction manualChamaedorea tepejilote carries — its genome. We read it from three angles — how big it is, how the DNA is packed into chromosomes, and how completely it has been sequenced — and explain how to read each value as you go.
Genome sizehow big the whole instruction manual is
Genome size≈637 602 222 bp assembly estimate
Measured in base pairs (bp) — the individual letters of DNA (human ≈ 3.2 Gb, a bacterium a few million). The chart places this genome on a logarithmic scale — each step to the right is ten times bigger — among reference organisms. Across species a bigger genome loosely tracks with larger cells, slower growth and lower-energy lifestyles (powered flight favours small genomes) — yet it does not imply more genes or a more advanced organism (the long-standing C-value paradox).
BACTERIUM Carsonella ruddii0.00016 Gb
FUNGUS0.04 Gb
INSECT0.25 Gb
THIS GENOME Chamaedorea tepejilote0.64 Gb
HUMAN3.2 Gb
WHEAT17 Gb
FERN Tmesipteris160.45 Gb
Chromosomes & ploidyhow the DNA is packaged
2n is the full chromosome count in a normal body cell; n is a gamete (egg or sperm), which carries half. Ploidy is how many complete chromosome sets each cell holds — 2× (diploid) is typical for animals, while higher levels (polyploidy) are common in plants. Click any value below to see the underlying records and sources.
Chromosome-count records — grouped by value · 2n = full set, n = gamete · click a value for sources & references
2n 322×CCDB · kew · CCDB · Cave1957
CCDB · kew — Cepeda-Cornejo V, Palomino G, Méndez I, Dirzo R. 2012. Intersexual comparison of DNA content by flow cytometry, and chromosome number in four dioecious Chamaedorea palms from Mexico. Caryologia 65: 263-270.
CCDB · Cave1957 — Eichhorn
Ploidy records — measured levels and diploid/polyploid inferences · click for sources
Sequencing statusassembly quality — how far to trust these numbers
Assembly level tells you how finished the sequence is — from fragmented contigs, through scaffolds, up to a full chromosome-level assembly. BUSCO % estimates completeness: the share of genes expected to be present that were actually found. These describe the data quality, not the organism.
Assembly levelScaffold
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type2 615 records
Wild obs. + sensor1 278
Museum / vouchered1 329
Cultivated / captive7
Other1
Origin
Native1
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO3 744 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 accuracy87% within 1 km
≤100 m 283≤1 km 128≤10 km 38>10 km 23
472 georeferenced · 806 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor1 278
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 accuracy86% within 1 km
≤100 m 357≤1 km 38≤10 km 48>10 km 14
457 georeferenced · 872 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence1 329
Cultivated / Captivenot free-living
A living individual in a botanical garden, zoo or nursery — cultivated or kept, not free-living.
Coordinate accuracy100% within 1 km
≤100 m 7
7 georeferenced
Open the mapnot free-living7
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 institutions36 of 57 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Saint Louis, US
276
Durango, MX
185
Mexico City, MX
162
National Biodiversity Institute, Costa Ricalocation not on record
116
Instituto para la Investigación y la Preservación del Patrimonio Cultural y Natural del Valle del Cauca - INCIVAlocation not on record
66
Museo Nacional de Costa Rica (MNCR)location not on record
62
Miami, US
61
Tuxtla Gutiérrez, MX
47
Universidad Nacional de Colombia (UNAL)location not on record
46
Ciudad de México, MX
31
Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IAvH)location not on record
27
Durham, US
23
Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabascolocation not on record
19
León, NI
14
Durban, ZA
13
Kew, GB
12
Area de Conservacion Guanacastelocation not on record
12
Tuxtla Gutiérrez, MX
11
Chapingo, MX
10
Tapachula, MX
9
Antiguo Cuscatlán, SV
8
Montecillo, Texcoco, MX
7
Mexico City, MX
6
Guatemala City, GT
6
San José, CR
5
MEXUlocation not on record
5
Sociedad para el Estudio de los Recursos Bióticos de Oaxaca, A. C.location not on record
4
Ciudad de México, MX
4
Universität Göttingenlocation not on record
4
Ann Arbor, US
4
Bronx, US
3
Austin, US
3
Mérida, MX
3
Guatemala, GT
3
Xiamen, CN
3
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana (PUJ)location not on record
3
Stockholm, SE
3
BMlocation not on record
2
Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Región Xalapalocation not on record
2
Chicago, US
2
Beijing, CN
2
Provincial Museum of Albertalocation not on record
2
CASlocation not on record
2
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduraslocation not on record
2
San Francisco de Campeche, MX
2
Claremont, US
2
North Carolina Zoological Parklocation not on record
2
Galeano, G."location not on record
1
East Lansing, US
1
Mexico City, MX
1
Cambridge, US
1
CUVClocation not on record
1
Instituto para la Investigación y la Preservación del Patrimonio Cultural y Natural del Valle del Cauca - INCIVAlocation not on record
1
Long Beach, US
1
Richmond, US
1
Guasave, MX
1
COLlocation not on record
1
57 institutions · 1 306 of 1 329 vouchered records shown · 23 without an institution code
Cultivated / Captivenot free-living
A living individual in a botanical garden, zoo or nursery — cultivated or kept, not free-living.
09Environmental DNA14 detections
Where the DNA of Chamaedorea tepejilote 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 found14
Studies independent surveys1
Countries1
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 14 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 median24.2 °C 24.1–25.2
Seasonal swing summer↔winter2.30 °C
Max temp (day)27.2 °C 26.7–30.1
Min temp (night)21.9 °C 21.1–22.2
Precipitation412 mm/mo 15.8–468
Air humidity70.7 % 59.3–75.5
Moisture balance275 mm/mo -165–334
Vapour deficit876 Pa 730–1,304
Wind speed1.30 m/s 1.30–5.60
Cloud cover34.2 % 13.5–42.5
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 13 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.