The article discusses the challenges and potential improvements in DNA barcoding for species identification and taxonomy. It highlights two major issues: how DNA data should be used in barcoding and the reaction of the taxonomic community to the initiative. The authors argue that DNA barcoding is a misnomer and prefer the term "Barcoding Life." They propose a phylogenetic systematic framework for an improved barcoder and a taxonomic framework that integrates classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding. The first issue concerns the use of DNA data to distinguish species (species identification) and discover new species (species delimitation). The authors suggest that character-based approaches are more appropriate than distance-based methods for DNA barcoding. They argue that distance-based methods have limitations, such as the inability to provide objective criteria for species delineation and the potential for subjective results. Character-based methods allow for the reconstruction of hierarchical relationships and can provide more accurate diagnoses. The second issue involves the reaction of the taxonomic community to the DNA barcoding initiative. The authors emphasize the need to reconcile classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding to ensure community acceptance. They suggest that DNA barcoding should be integrated with classical taxonomic methods to provide a more comprehensive approach to species identification. The article also discusses the choice of molecular markers for DNA barcoding, with a focus on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene (cox1). While cox1 is widely used, the authors argue that it may not be sufficient for all species due to its limited variability. They suggest that a combination of molecular and morphological data is necessary for accurate species identification. The authors also discuss the importance of sample size in DNA barcoding, emphasizing the need for sufficient numbers of individuals to capture representative within-species variation. They argue that a universal sample size is unlikely to be appropriate for all species and that pilot studies and background information on life history, dispersal ability, and mating patterns are necessary. The article presents case studies on the use of DNA barcoding in the genus Muntiacus (barking deer), the leech genus Hirudo, and the fish family Acipenseridae (sturgeons). These examples illustrate the challenges and potential of DNA barcoding in species identification and taxonomy. The authors conclude that a non-tree-based approach is more appropriate for constructing a barcode reader, as tree-based approaches can produce phylogenies based on a single poorly chosen molecule, leading to low support for hypotheses. They also emphasize the importance of integrating classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding to ensure accurate species identification and discovery.The article discusses the challenges and potential improvements in DNA barcoding for species identification and taxonomy. It highlights two major issues: how DNA data should be used in barcoding and the reaction of the taxonomic community to the initiative. The authors argue that DNA barcoding is a misnomer and prefer the term "Barcoding Life." They propose a phylogenetic systematic framework for an improved barcoder and a taxonomic framework that integrates classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding. The first issue concerns the use of DNA data to distinguish species (species identification) and discover new species (species delimitation). The authors suggest that character-based approaches are more appropriate than distance-based methods for DNA barcoding. They argue that distance-based methods have limitations, such as the inability to provide objective criteria for species delineation and the potential for subjective results. Character-based methods allow for the reconstruction of hierarchical relationships and can provide more accurate diagnoses. The second issue involves the reaction of the taxonomic community to the DNA barcoding initiative. The authors emphasize the need to reconcile classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding to ensure community acceptance. They suggest that DNA barcoding should be integrated with classical taxonomic methods to provide a more comprehensive approach to species identification. The article also discusses the choice of molecular markers for DNA barcoding, with a focus on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene (cox1). While cox1 is widely used, the authors argue that it may not be sufficient for all species due to its limited variability. They suggest that a combination of molecular and morphological data is necessary for accurate species identification. The authors also discuss the importance of sample size in DNA barcoding, emphasizing the need for sufficient numbers of individuals to capture representative within-species variation. They argue that a universal sample size is unlikely to be appropriate for all species and that pilot studies and background information on life history, dispersal ability, and mating patterns are necessary. The article presents case studies on the use of DNA barcoding in the genus Muntiacus (barking deer), the leech genus Hirudo, and the fish family Acipenseridae (sturgeons). These examples illustrate the challenges and potential of DNA barcoding in species identification and taxonomy. The authors conclude that a non-tree-based approach is more appropriate for constructing a barcode reader, as tree-based approaches can produce phylogenies based on a single poorly chosen molecule, leading to low support for hypotheses. They also emphasize the importance of integrating classical taxonomy with DNA barcoding to ensure accurate species identification and discovery.