HOW RELIABLE IS GENBANK–NCBI TAXONOMIC CLASSIFICATION? A CASE STUDY ON Diatraea saccharalis (LEPIDOPTERA: CRAMBIDAE)
Species misidentification, Phylogenetic analysis, Lepidoptera, Sugarcane pest, Phylogenomics
Brazil is the world's leading producer of sugarcane. However, pests such as the sugarcane
borer (Diatraea saccharalis), the primary sugarcane pest in the Americas, can cause
significant losses in crop production. To minimize the damage caused by this pest,
chemical, biological, and biotechnological control strategies have been employed. The
established use of parasitoids such as Cotesia flavipes, along with the recent adoption of
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) Cry toxins in genetically modified sugarcane (Bt sugarcane), has
gained prominence. However, in the case of Bt sugarcane, continuous use may select for
resistant populations, compromising pest control and highlighting the need for in-depth
studies on resistance mechanisms, often relying on genomic sequencing and transcriptomic
analyses. Accurate taxonomic identification of the species used for sequencing is essential
for reliable genomic and transcriptomic analyses, as the resulting data will serve as the
basis for subsequent studies. Traditionally, taxonomic identification relies on morphological
characteristics, which may require specialists who are not always readily available. In this
study, we analyzed Diatraea saccharalis sequences available in GenBank, including both
individual sequences and those from annotated genomes and transcriptomes, to assess
potential species misidentification. An initial phylogenetic analysis was performed using D.
saccharalis homologous sequences found in other species within the Crambidae family,
such as Diatraea impersonatella, Chilo suppressalis, Ostrinia nubilalis, and Ostrinia
furnacalis. Subsequently, a more detailed phylogenomic analysis was conducted using the
BUSCO tool, based on conserved single-copy genes across the genomes and
transcriptomes of these species. Species misidentification in major databases can severely
compromise research outcomes across multiple disciplines and may lead to misguided
strategies, particularly in critical areas like pest control and management.