Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31788358›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2019

Assessment of North American arthropod collections: prospects and challenges for addressing biodiversity research.

Neil S Cobb, Lawrence F Gall, Jennifer M Zaspel, Nicolas J Dowdy, Lindsie M McCabe, Akito Y Kawahara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Toward a brighter future for entomological collections.Annals of the Entomological Society of America · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Data integration enables global biodiversity synthesis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  11. PeerJ · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

6 authors.

Neil S CobbDepartment of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States of America.
Lawrence F GallEntomology Division, Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, New Haven, CT, United States of America.
Jennifer M ZaspelDepartment of Zoology, Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, WI, United States of America.
Nicolas J DowdyDepartment of Zoology, Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, WI, United States of America.
Lindsie M McCabeDepartment of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States of America.
Akito Y KawaharaFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over 300 million arthropod specimens are housed in North American natural history collections. These collections represent a "vast hidden treasure trove" of biodiversity -95% of the specimen label data have yet to be transcribed for research, and less than 2% of the specimens have been imaged. Specimen labels contain crucial information to determine species distributions over time and are essential for understanding patterns of ecology and evolution, which will help assess the growing biodiversity crisis driven by global change impacts. Specimen images offer indispensable insight and data for analyses of traits, and ecological and phylogenetic patterns of biodiversity. Here, we review North American arthropod collections using two key metrics, specimen holdings and digitization efforts, to assess the potential for collections to provide needed biodiversity data. We include data from 223 arthropod collections in North America, with an emphasis on the United States. Our specific findings are as follows: (1) The majority of North American natural history collections (88%) and specimens (89%) are located in the United States. Canada has comparable holdings to the United States relative to its estimated biodiversity. Mexico has made the furthest progress in terms of digitization, but its specimen holdings should be increased to reflect the estimated higher Mexican arthropod diversity. The proportion of North American collections that has been digitized, and the number of digital records available per species, are both much lower for arthropods when compared to chordates and plants. (2) The National Science Foundation's decade-long ADBC program (Advancing Digitization of Biological Collections) has been transformational in promoting arthropod digitization. However, even if this program became permanent, at current rates, by the year 2050 only 38% of the existing arthropod specimens would be digitized, and less than 1% would have associated digital images. (3) The number of specimens in collections has increased by approximately 1% per year over the past 30 years. We propose that this rate of increase is insufficient to provide enough data to address biodiversity research needs, and that arthropod collections should aim to triple their rate of new specimen acquisition. (4) The collections we surveyed in the United States vary broadly in a number of indicators. Collectively, there is depth and breadth, with smaller collections providing regional depth and larger collections providing greater global coverage. (5) Increased coordination across museums is needed for digitization efforts to target taxa for research and conservation goals and address long-term data needs. Two key recommendations emerge: collections should significantly increase both their specimen holdings and their digitization efforts to empower continental and global biodiversity data pipelines, and stimulate downstream research.

Indexed as

ArthropodsBiodiversityDigitizationNatural history collectionsNorth America

Identifiers

PMID31788358
PMCPMC6882419

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.