Would an RRS by any other name sound as RAD?

Abstract

Sampling markers throughout a genome with restriction enzymes emerged in the 2000s as reduced representation shotgun sequencing (RRS). Rapid advances in sequencing technology have since spurred modifications of RRS, giving rise to many derivatives with unique names, such as RADseq. But naming conventions have often been more creative than consistent, with unclear criteria for recognition as a unique method resulting in a proliferation of names characterized by ambiguity. We conducted a literature review to assess methodological and etymological relationships among 36 restriction enzyme-based methods, as well as rates of correct referencing of commonly-used methods. We identify several instances of methodological convergence or misattribution in the literature, and note that many published derivatives have modified only minor elements of parent protocols. We urge greater restraint in naming derivative methods, to strike a better balance between clarity, recognition of scientific innovation, and correct attribution.