Habitat GIFTÁrea Antrópica, Campo de Altitude, Campo Limpo, Campo Rupestre
Woodinessnon-woody
05DNA & barcoding3 specimens
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 Polygala brasiliensis has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
DNA specimens3
Marker genes3
GenBank sequences6
eDNA detections3
Countries1
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.
★matK2★ITS4★ITS2
plant barcodefungal barcode
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type174 records
Museum / vouchered174
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO456 km²
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 accuracy0% within 1 km
≤10 km 2>10 km 3
5 georeferenced · 169 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence174
10Collections & institutions
Holding institutions13 of 38 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
Universidade Federale do Rio Grande do Sullocation not on record
51
Bronx, US
30
Stockholm, SE
15
UFSClocation not on record
8
PUC-RSlocation not on record
6
Centro de Pesquisas Agropecuarias do Tropico Umidolocation not on record
5
Laboratorio de Ictiologialocation not on record
4
UNICAMPlocation not on record
4
San Isidro, AR
4
Ivano-Frankivsk, UA
3
Badajoz, ES
3
Saint Louis, US
3
Entomological Society of Latvialocation not on record
2
USP-IBlocation not on record
2
Castelar, AR
2
Kew, GB
2
UNESP-RClocation not on record
2
Cenargenlocation not on record
2
Londrina, BR
2
Ural Federal University "B. N. Yeltsin"location not on record
2
University of Stellenboschlocation not on record
2
San Jose State University, Museum of Birds and Mammalslocation not on record
1
Feira de Santana, BR
1
Empresa Pernambucana de Pesquisa Agropecuária, IPAlocation not on record
1
JBRJlocation not on record
1
UFPRlocation not on record
1
UERJlocation not on record
1
IAPlocation not on record
1
Departamento de Geologia, Universidad de Chilelocation not on record
1
Laboratory of Palaeontologylocation not on record
1
UFMSlocation not on record
1
Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeirolocation not on record
1
Blumenau, BR
1
UNESP-FCAlocation not on record
1
South Kensington, GB
1
Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldilocation not on record
1
Córdoba, AR
1
Istituto Agrario Castelnuovolocation not on record
1
38 institutions · 171 of 174 vouchered records shown · 2 without an institution code
09Environmental DNA3 detections
Where the DNA of Polygala brasiliensis 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 found3
Studies independent surveys1
Countries1
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 3 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 median23.6 °C 23.6–23.6
Seasonal swing summer↔winter9.80 °C
Max temp (day)28.5 °C
Min temp (night)19.6 °C
Precipitation112 mm/mo
Air humidity59.1 %
Moisture balance-21.8 mm/mo
Vapour deficit1,218 Pa
Wind speed2.70 m/s
Cloud cover37.5 %
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.
