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 Daboecia cantabrica has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens5
Marker genes4
eDNA detections6
Countries2
Marker genes sequenced
★ 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.
★matK★rbcL★ITS★ITS2
plant barcodefungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceCCDB
The complete instruction manualDaboecia cantabrica 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 size469 440 000 bp
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 Daboecia cantabrica0.47 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.
Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.
Coordinate accuracy70% within 1 km
≤100 m 8 226≤1 km 744≤10 km 3 754>10 km 56
12 780 georeferenced · 2 691 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor15 471
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 accuracy60% within 1 km
≤100 m 37≤1 km 149≤10 km 115>10 km 7
308 georeferenced · 219 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence527
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
≤1 km 3
3 georeferenced
Open the mapnot free-living3
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 institutions33 of 52 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Entomological Society of Latvialocation not on record
67
San Sebastián, ES
49
MAlocation not on record
48
València, ES
44
Vitoria, ES
41
Barcelona, ES
35
Santiago de Compostela, ES
30
Salamanca, ES
23
College of the Atlantic, Museumlocation not on record
22
CICYTEXlocation not on record
17
Madrid, ES
15
BClocation not on record
12
Dublin, IE
10
Museo Achille Folettolocation not on record
10
Alicante, ES
9
Universidad del Pais Vasco (UPV/EHU)location not on record
9
ISAlocation not on record
8
South Kensington, GB
7
Pamplona, ES
6
Granada, ES
6
Badajoz, ES
6
OLAlocation not on record
4
Madrid, ES
3
Wlocation not on record
3
Pamplona, ES
3
Jaén, ES
3
Oskarshamn, SE
2
Phyletisches Museum Jenalocation not on record
2
San Jose State University, Museum of Birds and Mammalslocation not on record
2
University of New Hampshirelocation not on record
2
Vancouver, CA
2
Canadian Department of Agriculturelocation not on record
2
Córdoba, ES
2
Santa Barbara, US
2
STUlocation not on record
1
Madison, US
1
Bourges, FR
1
Porrentruy, CH
1
Saint Louis, US
1
Chongqing Museumlocation not on record
1
Adelaide, AU
1
Kew, GB
1
IPE-CSIClocation not on record
1
Royal Botanic Garden Edinburghlocation not on record
1
Denver, US
1
Berlin, DE
1
Victoria, CA
1
Christchurch, NZ
1
Henry Brockhouse Collectionlocation not on record
1
Gijón, ES
1
Banyoles, ES
1
Helsinki, FI
1
52 institutions · 524 of 527 vouchered records shown · 3 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 DNA6 detections
Where the DNA of Daboecia cantabrica 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 found6
Studies independent surveys1
Countries2
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 6 detections have coordinates
Open the map2 countries0
National Botanic Gardens, Growing in the gar…
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 median15.4 °C 14.2–15.4
Seasonal swing summer↔winter15.3 °C
Max temp (day)20.5 °C 17.5–20.5
Min temp (night)10.4 °C 10.4–10.7
Precipitation70.4 mm/mo 70.4–73.8
Air humidity57.7 % 57.7–61.0
Moisture balance-28.0 mm/mo -33.0–-28.0
Vapour deficit804 Pa 647–804
Wind speed2.90 m/s 2.90–3.00
Cloud cover41.2 % 41.2–47.5
CHELSA 1981–2010, ~9 km grid, at location & month of 3 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.