Performance of DNA metabarcoding, standard barcoding and morphological approaches in the identification of insect biodiversity

Abstract For two decades, DNA barcoding and, more recently, DNA metabarcoding have been used for molecular species identification and estimating biodiversity. Despite their growing use, few studies have systematically evaluated these methods. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of barcoding methods in identifying species and estimating biodiversity, by assessing their consistency with traditional morphological identification and evaluating how assignment consistency is influenced by taxonomic group, sequence similarity thresholds and geographic distance. We first analysed 951 insect specimens across three taxonomic groups: butterflies, bumblebees and parasitic wasps, using both morphological taxonomy and single‐specimen COI DNA barcoding. An additional 25,047 butterfly specimens were identified by COI DNA metabarcoding. Finally, we performed a systematic review of 99 studies to assess average consistency between insect species identity assigned via morphology and COI barcoding and to examine the distribution of research effort. Species assignment consistency was influenced by taxonomic group, sequence similarity thresholds and geographic distance. An average assignment consistency of 49% was found across taxonomic groups, with parasitic wasps displaying lower consistency due to taxonomic impediment. The number of missing matches doubled with a 100% sequence similarity threshold and COI intraspecific variation increased with geographic distance. Metabarcoding results aligned well with morphological biodiversity estimates and a strong positive correlation between sequence reads and species abundance was found. The systematic review revealed an 89% average consistency and also indicated taxonomic and geographic biases in research effort. Together, our findings demonstrate that while problems persist, barcoding approaches offer robust alternatives to traditional taxonomy for biodiversity assessment.