Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30427869›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

The informative value of museum collections for ecology and conservation: A comparison with target sampling in the Brazilian Atlantic forest.

Vitor Dias Tarli, Philippe Grandcolas, Roseli Pellens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Spatial Patterns and Diversity of the GenusPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Vitor Dias TarliInstitut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB-UMR 7205)-Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, CNRS, Ecole Pratique de Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne Université -CP50, Paris, France.
Philippe GrandcolasInstitut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB-UMR 7205)-Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, CNRS, Ecole Pratique de Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne Université -CP50, Paris, France.
Roseli PellensInstitut de Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB-UMR 7205)-Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, CNRS, Ecole Pratique de Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne Université -CP50, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2996-3957

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since two decades the richness and potential of natural history collections (NHC) were rediscovered and emphasized, promoting a revolution in the access on data of species occurrence, and fostering the development of several disciplines. Nevertheless, due to their inherent erratic nature, NHC data are plagued by several biases. Understanding these biases is a major issue, particularly because ecological niche models (ENMs) are based on the assumption that data are not biased. Based on it, a recent body of research have focused on searching adequate methods for dealing with biased data and proposed the use of filters in geographical and environmental space. Although the strength of filtering in environmental space has been shown with virtual species, nothing has yet been tested with a real dataset including field validation. In order to contribute to this task, we explore this issue by comparing a dataset from NHC to a recent targeted sampling of the cockroach genus Monastria Saussure, 1864 in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. We showed that, despite strong similarities, the area modeled with NHC data was much smaller. These differences were due to strong climate biases, which increased model's specificity and reduced sensitivity. By applying two forms of rarefaction in the environmental space, we showed that deleting points at random in the most biased climate class is a powerful way for increasing model's sensitivity, so making predictions more suitable to the reality.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeConservation of Natural ResourcesMuseumsAnimalsBiodiversityBrazilCockroachesEcologyEcosystem

Identifiers

PMID30427869
PMCPMC6235285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.