1. Loss of reproducibility. The scientific data supporting the description of a species may not be reproducible, particularly if the original material (DNA) is damaged or lost or if no scientific distribution of nonproliferating material is anticipated.
2. Loss of quality. The changing standards for genomic DNA sequence quality present potential complications when DNA sequence type material is replaced by new versions and the species descriptions have to be consequently revised.
3. Loss of information of function. To date, functional assessments for genomes are limited and do not necessarily allow recognition or prediction of distinguishing phenotypic traits that may define the taxa.
4. Single DNA sequence species. The problems of defining what is required to present new taxa will increase. It is already current practice to describe novel species on the basis of single strains, while their intraspecies diversity at the genotypic and phenotypic level is a priori unknown. The SeqCode will lead to the proposal of unknown numbers of novel species based on the description of single DNA sequences only and will lead to taxonomic and nomenclatural chaos.
5. Loss of information about species. The motivation for researchers to cultivate and preserve strains and to attempt to investigate phenotypes will decrease, resulting in unknown intra- and interspecies diversity, at the phenotypic levels.
6. MAGs can be contaminated. Metagenome
assembled genomes can have up to 5% contamination which is equivalent to 250 predicted
open reading frames in E. coli.
7. Ambiguous nomenclature of prokaryotes. Two biologically different species can get the same name.
© Henrik Christensen