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 Psoroglaena stigonemoides has left across the world's sequence archives.
At a glance
Marker genes1
GenBank sequences2
eDNA detections1
Countries2
The DNA barcodea real sequence read deposited for this species
Psoroglaena stigonemoides voucher PRA-Vondrak24993 internal transcribed spacer 1, partial sequence; 5.8S ribosomal RNA gene and internal transcribed spacer 2, complete sequence; and large subunit ribosomal RNA gene, partial sequence
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.
★ITS2
fungal barcode
08Occurrence & distribution
Record type749 records
Wild obs. + sensor628
Museum / vouchered114
Cultivated / captive2
Other5
Range
Area of Occupancy AOO2 004 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 accuracy42% within 1 km
≤100 m 172≤1 km 88≤10 km 359>10 km 4
623 georeferenced · 5 without coordinates
Open the mapobservation + sensor628
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 accuracy67% within 1 km
≤100 m 1≤1 km 13≤10 km 7
21 georeferenced · 93 without coordinates
Open the institutions mapphysical evidence114
Cultivated / Captivenot free-living
A living individual in a botanical garden, zoo or nursery — cultivated or kept, not free-living.
Coordinate accuracy
no georeferenced coordinates · 2 records without
Open the mapnot free-living2
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 institutions6 of 14 geolocated
Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.
Institution
Specimens
BDBClocation not on record
80
MAlocation not on record
10
CJBGlocation not on record
4
Edinburgh, GB
4
Vitoria, ES
3
MeiseBGlocation not on record
2
TSBlocation not on record
2
Barcelona, ES
1
Vancouver, CA
1
IAPlocation not on record
1
National Biodiversity Institute, Costa Ricalocation not on record
1
Madison, US
1
GZUlocation not on record
1
South Kensington, GB
1
14 institutions · 112 of 114 vouchered records shown · 2 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 DNA1 detections
Where the DNA of Psoroglaena stigonemoides 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 found1
Studies independent surveys1
Countries1
Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections
Where its DNA was found
0 of 1 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 median5.50 °C 5.50–5.50
Seasonal swing summer↔winter10.7 °C
Max temp (day)6.80 °C
Min temp (night)3.50 °C
Precipitation104 mm/mo
Air humidity65.4 %
Moisture balance66.4 mm/mo
Vapour deficit312 Pa
Wind speed5.80 m/s
Cloud cover54.2 %
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.
