ArticleBMC bioinformatics2013
The taxonomic name resolution service: an online tool for automated standardization of plant names.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 152 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
152 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 540 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of genome duplication on secondary metabolite composition in non-cultivated species: a systematic meta-analysis.Annals of botany · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The origin and development of the Miocene northwest African savanna.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- The Consumption of Edible Leaves by Afro-Descendants in French Guiana and Suriname: An Overview of a Constantly Evolving Ethno-Culinary Practice.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bridging data silos to holistically model plant macrophenology.The New phytologist · 2026Review
- Celtic Invasive Plants database.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Programmatic access to ICTV virus taxonomy through a public ontology API.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Storing accepted scientific names alone can lead to misinterpretation of botanical data.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multiple Community Properties Drive Ecosystem Resistance and Resilience to Extreme Climate Events Across Mesic Grasslands.Ecology letters · 2026Article
- From paper to pixels - digitized maps of vascular plant distributions in Denmark in the early 20th century.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Occurrence and environmental data for aquatic plants of Minnesota from 1999-2018.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Tree diversity is changing across tropical Andean and Amazonian forests in response to global change.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- Article
- A scalable exemplar-based method for aligning biological taxonomies.Biodiversity data journal · 2026Article
- How similar are species names and why does this matter for biodiversity data.Biodiversity data journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Logging intensity alters tree species composition and wood density, but not tree diversity, in lowland forests in Vietnam.Biodiversity and conservation · 2026Article
- Rooting for function: community-level fine-root traits relate to many ecosystem functions.The New phytologist · 2025Article
- Diversity-Elevation Relationships of Vascular Plants in Austral Temperate Ecosystems Are Strata Dependent.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- General laws of biodiversity: Climatic niches predict plant range size and ecological dominance globally.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
92 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe digitization of biodiversity data is leading to the widespread application of taxon names that are superfluous, ambiguous or incorrect, resulting in mismatched records and inflated species numbers. The ultimate consequences of misspelled names and bad taxonomy are erroneous scientific conclusions and faulty policy decisions. The lack of tools for correcting this 'names problem' has become a fundamental obstacle to integrating disparate data sources and advancing the progress of biodiversity science.
resultsThe TNRS, or Taxonomic Name Resolution Service, is an online application for automated and user-supervised standardization of plant scientific names. The TNRS builds upon and extends existing open-source applications for name parsing and fuzzy matching. Names are standardized against multiple reference taxonomies, including the Missouri Botanical Garden's Tropicos database. Capable of processing thousands of names in a single operation, the TNRS parses and corrects misspelled names and authorities, standardizes variant spellings, and converts nomenclatural synonyms to accepted names. Family names can be included to increase match accuracy and resolve many types of homonyms. Partial matching of higher taxa combined with extraction of annotations, accession numbers and morphospecies allows the TNRS to standardize taxonomy across a broad range of active and legacy datasets.
conclusionsWe show how the TNRS can resolve many forms of taxonomic semantic heterogeneity, correct spelling errors and eliminate spurious names. As a result, the TNRS can aid the integration of disparate biological datasets. Although the TNRS was developed to aid in standardizing plant names, its underlying algorithms and design can be extended to all organisms and nomenclatural codes. The TNRS is accessible via a web interface at http://tnrs.iplantcollaborative.org/ and as a RESTful web service and application programming interface. Source code is available at https://github.com/iPlantCollaborativeOpenSource/TNRS/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.