Literature DB >> 29083043

Widespread sampling biases in herbaria revealed from large-scale digitization.

Barnabas H Daru1, Daniel S Park1, Richard B Primack2, Charles G Willis1, David S Barrington3, Timothy J S Whitfeld4, Tristram G Seidler5, Patrick W Sweeney6, David R Foster7, Aaron M Ellison7,8, Charles C Davis1.   

Abstract

Nonrandom collecting practices may bias conclusions drawn from analyses of herbarium records. Recent efforts to fully digitize and mobilize regional floras online offer a timely opportunity to assess commonalities and differences in herbarium sampling biases. We determined spatial, temporal, trait, phylogenetic, and collector biases in c. 5 million herbarium records, representing three of the most complete digitized floras of the world: Australia (AU), South Africa (SA), and New England, USA (NE). We identified numerous shared and unique biases among these regions. Shared biases included specimens collected close to roads and herbaria; specimens collected more frequently during biological spring and summer; specimens of threatened species collected less frequently; and specimens of close relatives collected in similar numbers. Regional differences included overrepresentation of graminoids in SA and AU and of annuals in AU; and peak collection during the 1910s in NE, 1980s in SA, and 1990s in AU. Finally, in all regions, a disproportionately large percentage of specimens were collected by very few individuals. We hypothesize that these mega-collectors, with their associated preferences and idiosyncrasies, shaped patterns of collection bias via 'founder effects'. Studies using herbarium collections should account for sampling biases, and future collecting efforts should avoid compounding these biases to the extent possible.
© 2017 The Authors. New Phytologist © 2017 New Phytologist Trust.

Entities:  

Keywords:  collector bias; geographic bias; herbarium; regional flora; sampling bias; temporal bias; trait bias

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29083043     DOI: 10.1111/nph.14855

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  New Phytol        ISSN: 0028-646X            Impact factor:   10.151


  40 in total

1.  Biological collections for understanding biodiversity in the Anthropocene.

Authors:  Emily K Meineke; T Jonathan Davies; Barnabas H Daru; Charles C Davis
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Herbarium specimens reveal substantial and unexpected variation in phenological sensitivity across the eastern United States.

Authors:  Daniel S Park; Ian Breckheimer; Alex C Williams; Edith Law; Aaron M Ellison; Charles C Davis
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  A novel proof of concept for capturing the diversity of endophytic fungi preserved in herbarium specimens.

Authors:  Barnabas H Daru; Elizabeth A Bowman; Donald H Pfister; A Elizabeth Arnold
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Facets of phylodiversity: evolutionary diversification, divergence and survival as conservation targets.

Authors:  Matthew M Kling; Brent D Mishler; Andrew H Thornhill; Bruce G Baldwin; David D Ackerly
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 5.  The history and impact of digitization and digital data mobilization on biodiversity research.

Authors:  Gil Nelson; Shari Ellis
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Visualizing natural history collection data provides insight into collection development and bias.

Authors:  Vaughn Shirey
Journal:  Biodivers Data J       Date:  2018-10-03

7.  Bookkeeping of insect herbivory trends in herbarium specimens of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria).

Authors:  Caroline Beaulieu; Claude Lavoie; Raphaël Proulx
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  Monarch butterfly and milkweed declines substantially predate the use of genetically modified crops.

Authors:  J H Boyle; H J Dalgleish; J R Puzey
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-02-05       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  A checklist for maximizing reproducibility of ecological niche models.

Authors:  Xiao Feng; Daniel S Park; Cassondra Walker; A Townsend Peterson; Cory Merow; Monica Papeş
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 15.460

10.  iNaturalist as a tool to expand the research value of museum specimens.

Authors:  J Mason Heberling; Bonnie L Isaac
Journal:  Appl Plant Sci       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 1.936

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.