Who will actually use DNA barcoding and what will it cost?

It is likely that the mere use of the word barcode is responsible for much of the appeal surrounding DNA barcoding, after all DNA-based identification methods (e.g., DeSalle and Birstein, 1996) used prior to Hebert et al.'s (2002) proposal of the term failed to ignite significant attention from the scientific community and none whatsoever from the general public. The term itself is loaded. Product barcodes are scanned using checkout lasers and indeed the image of the "Star Trek tricorder," a handheld scanner, has been used repeatedly by bar-coding proponents in both presentations and papers (Janzen, 2004; Smith, 2005). Savolainen et al. (2005) use just such an allusion to commence their introductory paper of a special issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London devoted to DNA barcoding. Although the need for scanners capable of detecting biological weapons will undoubtedly lead to the development of portable DNA scanners at some point (a stated objective of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Directorate for Science and Technology), there is, however, absolutely no indication that they will be affordable or practical for the kinds of mass identification uses that bar-coding proponents are selling to the general public as the outcome of this research. Further, a critical difference between a "tricorder" and a portable DNA barcoder would be the DNA component. Whereas Mr. Spock need only wave his tricorder in the general direction of an alien to be told what it is, real-world barcoders will need to actually handle that animal, remove tissue from it, and load it into the barcoder to get an identification. DNA barcoding is intrinsically linked to specimens as samples that must be collected for DNA extraction, be it in a molecular biology laboratory as at present or by a handheld barcoder at some point in the future. This small detail neatly circum-scribes what barcoding can, and what it can't, achieve. Who then would use DNA barcoding? Dan Janzen has written eloquently and spoken passionately about the need to improve biological literacy amongst the general public and that without the ability to "read" nature by identifying its contents, biodiversity is doomed to be un-derappreciated and so destroyed (see Janzen et al., 2005, for full development of this argument). One wonders what the place for even a portable DNA barcoder is in this vision. The majority of the public observes nature; they don't sample it by removing the legs …