The Berried Clubby Molt & Moss
Menu

Open this record in the complete research map

Morphology or taxonomy Neocaridina identity evidence

Barcoding of ornamental freshwater shrimp, Neocaridina denticulata (De Haan, 1844) from the aquatic ornamental market in Purbalingga, Central Java, Indonesia

Kusmintarsih et al., 2023. Biodiversitas 24(7): 3766-3773.

Open the source

This record is a claim boundary, not a quality badge. Evidence class and species relationship describe what was studied. They do not make the result universal, complete or automatically applicable to a home aquarium.

Source taxon as published
Market-sourced ornamental shrimp reported as Neocaridina denticulata from Purbalingga, Central Java; no voucher-based identification was reported
Environment
Shrimp collected in August 2019 from the Purbalingga ornamental fish market and transported to a laboratory; seller, source farm, number of source aquaria and prior breeding history were not reported
Life stages
market specimen of unreported sex and life stage, egg-carrying market specimen under some colour labels
Reviewed
2026-08-12

What was studied

Study shape: Abdominal tissue from ten visibly labelled market samples was extracted. A custom primer designed from a Neocaridina denticulata mitochondrial reference amplified an approximately 545-base-pair CO1 fragment. Bidirectional sequences were assembled, compared with one primary BLAST reference and placed in a neighbour-joining tree with selected GenBank sequences and one distant outgroup.

Experimental unit: One destructive tissue sample per visible colour entry, with ten sequence entries in the result tables; the paper does not report vouchers, specimen IDs, seller or aquarium clustering, replicate extractions, independent PCR confirmation or public accession numbers for the new sequences

Endpoints: CO1 PCR band, assembled fragment length, BLAST identity, neighbour-joining placement, reported pairwise genetic distance.

Claim boundary

What it can support: Within this market sample and assay, the ten sequence entries labelled dark red, bright red, black, white, blue-black combinations or yellow were reported at 98.24 to 99.29 percent identity to the same Chinese N. denticulata mitochondrial reference, and the study reported zero pairwise distance among its sampled sequences. Visible colour labels therefore did not separate those sampled entries into different reported CO1 groups.

What it cannot support: This is a ten-specimen convenience sample from one market, not a survey of named global trade lines, farms, sellers or source populations. Collection wording does not resolve whether specimens came from one seller, aquarium, brood or colony. No morphological key, sex-based diagnostic structures, voucher deposition, extraction blank, PCR negative control, replicate extraction or new sequence accession is reported, so the specimen identity and sequence audit cannot be independently reconstructed from the article. The blue lane in Figure 2 has no band, the figure numbers lanes 1 to 10 while the text refers to samples 2 to 11, and Table 2 reports ten sequence entries without a standalone blue entry. The methods and Figure 3 describe a Jukes-Cantor tree, while Table 3 is labelled Kimura 2 parameter. The article reports 0.00 distance among the study entries even though their BLAST identities to the same reference vary from 98.24 to 99.29 percent, and its new sequences are not shown as deposited accessions. Low branch support appears across several reference relationships, the outgroup is a tunicate rather than a closer atyid, and the selected reference labels include disputed or inconsistent Neocaridina names. A short mitochondrial fragment records one maternally inherited locus; it cannot establish nuclear ancestry, pedigree, relatedness, genetic purity, line stability, inheritance, hybrid status or the species identity of another shrimp based on colour or a matching seller label.

Publication status audit

Matched in dated Crossref query

The canonical DOI appeared in the dated broad query and carried no registered update in that response. This is a metadata observation, not proof that the work has never changed.

Metadata snapshot reviewed 2026-08-12. Inspect the method, unmatched queue and limitations.

Correction impact

If this source boundary changes, these are the known downstream consumers. The list distinguishes scientific re-review from generated parity and historical follow-up.

Editorial review required (11)

This curated wording or synthesis must be reconsidered when the source boundary changes. A passing generator test cannot decide the new scientific meaning.

  • Colour proves the species or purity of a line Curated claim check
    The exact claim trace uses this record as limitation context: A short mitochondrial market-stock record does not establish pedigree, purity or all species alternatives.
  • colours decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • genetics decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • species decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • Visible colour can change without proving inherited identity Curated evidence comparison
    The bounded reconciliation and unresolved question use this record in an explicit comparison.
  • A published species name is evidence context, not permanent identity Curated evidence comparison
    The bounded reconciliation and unresolved question use this record in an explicit comparison.
  • colours practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • genetics practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • species practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • round1-taxonomy-identity Curated first-round reviewer assignment
    The frozen reviewer scope or consequential-failure check uses this record through the assigned claim trace or comparison and must be reconsidered before invitation or response.
  • round1-taxonomy-lineage Curated first-round reviewer assignment
    The frozen reviewer scope or consequential-failure check uses this record through the assigned claim trace or comparison and must be reconsidered before invitation or response.

Generated from governing registry (19)

This surface derives from a governing registry and should update with it, but release tests must still prove parity and routing.

Historical record needs follow-up decision (1)

Do not silently rewrite history. Decide whether the prior change record remains accurate and publish a new correction or scope note when needed.

Inspect the corpus-wide propagation audit.

How this record is classified

Morphology or taxonomy: Anatomy, specimen identification or taxonomic relationships were studied with stated methods. A trade name or photograph cannot replace those methods.

Neocaridina identity evidence: The source addresses identity, relationships or genetics within the Neocaridina complex.

Topics: Species and taxonomy, Genetics, Colour

Critically appraise this source without a score

These questions fit this record's morphology or taxonomy role. They are prompts, not automatic judgments. Open the original source to answer them.

  1. Identity and provenance: How were the organism, population, stock and life stage identified and sourced? A published name or seller label can hide a taxonomic, population or life-stage transfer.
  2. Independent unit: What unit was independently assigned or sampled, and how many units support each comparison? Animal counts do not create independent replication when animals share a vessel, site, family or treatment history.
  3. Comparison and context: What was the actual comparator, allocation process, environment, duration and material condition? A result has meaning only against the comparison and conditions that produced it.
  4. Endpoint and measurement: Which endpoint was measured, with what method, unit, timing, resolution and decision rule? One endpoint cannot silently become survival, welfare, diagnosis, reproduction or long-term population performance.
  5. Denominators and missingness: Are starting counts, exclusions, losses, missing observations and analysis denominators reconciled? Unreported or changing denominators can alter the apparent direction, precision and applicability of a result.
  6. Transfer boundary: What is the nearest tempting aquarium claim that this source design cannot establish? Direct evidence can still be narrow, and adjacent evidence can be useful only while the inference remains visible.
  7. Examined material: Which specimens, localities, sexes, stages, types or sequence accessions were actually examined? A diagnosis applies to examined material and methods, not automatically to a trade-line photograph.
  8. Diagnostic characters: Which characters or loci distinguish the taxon, and were alternatives explicitly compared? Color alone may be variable, convergent or unrelated to the diagnostic character.
  9. Name history: Were synonyms, historical combinations, type material and later revisions checked? An older title can describe a population that later work placed in another taxon.
  10. Consumer identification limit: Can the required character or method be observed reliably in an ordinary live-animal image? A valid taxonomic method may still be unavailable to a keeper examining one photograph.

Read the complete appraisal framework.

Where it is used

Where this result is compared

These governed comparisons show why this record can appear to conflict with another result without electing a winner or hiding unresolved uncertainty.

Reuse the reviewed citation boundary

Download CSL-JSON or download RIS. Both retain this record's support, limitation and review note.

Challenge a transcription, interpretation or missing boundary. A challenge changes the record only after editorial review.