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 Ficus lacor has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens2
Marker genes2
eDNA detections2
Countries1
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.
★rbcL★ITS2
plant barcodefungal barcode
06Genome at a glanceGoaT
The complete instruction manualFicus lacor 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.
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.
Ploidydiploid inferred
Ploidy records — measured levels and diploid/polyploid inferences · click for sources
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 accuracy50% within 1 km
≤1 km 1≤10 km 1
2 georeferenced · 112 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence114
10Collections & institutions
Holding institutions21 of 34 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Yangling, CN
29
Chongqing Natural History Museumlocation not on record
10
Wuhan, CN
8
Beijing, CN
7
Central China Agricultural Universitylocation not on record
5
Nanjing, CN
5
Institute for Agricultural Bacteriology and Fermentation Biologylocation not on record
4
Xiamen, CN
4
Shanghai, CN
4
Kunming, CN
3
Peking Universitylocation not on record
3
Guilin, CN
3
Central China Normal Universitylocation not on record
2
nlocation not on record
2
Chengdu, CN
2
Wuhan, CN
2
Guiyang, CN
2
Saint Louis, US
2
Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology (VAST)location not on record
2
University of Stellenboschlocation not on record
1
Miami, US
1
South China Normal Universitylocation not on record
1
LDlocation not on record
1
Sri Ramaswamy Memorial Universitylocation not on record
1
Beijing, CN
1
Tampa, US
1
South Kensington, GB
1
Beijing Normal Universitylocation not on record
1
Xian, CN
1
Guangzhou, CN
1
Bronx, US
1
Guangzhou, CN
1
Canberra, AU
1
MSB-3349location not on record
1
34 institutions · 114 of 114 vouchered records shown
09Environmental DNA2 detections
Where the DNA of Ficus lacor 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 found2
Studies independent surveys1
Countries1
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 2 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 median25.1 °C 25.1–25.1
Seasonal swing summer↔winter16.5 °C
Max temp (day)30.5 °C
Min temp (night)19.3 °C
Precipitation109 mm/mo
Air humidity52.0 %
Moisture balance-17.8 mm/mo
Vapour deficit1,616 Pa
Wind speed1.80 m/s
Cloud cover25.2 %
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.
