ReviewSystematic biology2020
Repositories for Taxonomic Data: Where We Are and What is Missing.
Review in Systematic biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Type Genomics: A Framework for Integrating Genomic Data into Biodiversity and Taxonomic Research.Systematic biology · 2025Guideline
- Manage your image database with computer vision-Lessons learned at Encyclopedia of Life.Bioscience · 2026Article
- Speeding up taxonomy in the digital age: A deep learning approach for identifying cryptic freshwater snails.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Inferring Time-to-Speciation From Hybrid Zone Analysis Informs Assessments of Taxonomic Inflation.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Global biodiversity and the expanding Tree of Life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Croaking for haste: How long does it take to describe a frog species since its discovery?PloS one · 2026Article
- The past and future of known biodiversity: Rates, patterns, and projections of new species over time.Science advances · 2025Article
- How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge.Journal of mammalogy · 2025Article
- Chemotaxonomy, an Efficient Tool for Medicinal Plant Identification: Current Trends and Limitations.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- In Vouchers We (Hope to) Trust: Unveiling Hidden Errors in GenBank's Tetrapod Taxonomic Foundations.Molecular ecology · 2025Review
- The impact of taxonomic change on the Amazonian palm flora.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- "Dark taxonomy": A new protocol for overcoming the taxonomic impediments for dark taxa and broadening the taxon base for biodiversity assessment.Cladistics : the international journal of the Willi Hennig Society · 2025Article
- Commentary on "Preliminary Species Hypotheses" in Entomological Taxonomy: A Global Data and FAIR Infrastructure Perspective.Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- Improving the gold standard in NCBI GenBank and related databases: DNA sequences from type specimens and type strains.Systematic biology · 2024Article
- Trait-mediated speciation and human-driven extinctions in proboscideans revealed by unsupervised Bayesian neural networks.Science advances · 2024Article
- PROTAX-GPU: a scalable probabilistic taxonomic classification system for DNA barcodes.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
- GINSA: an accumulator for paired locality and next-generation small ribosomal subunit sequence data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Whole-genome sequencing in medicinal plants: current progress and prospect.Science China. Life sciences · 2024Review
- DNA Barcoding in Species Delimitation: From Genetic Distances to Integrative Taxonomy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural history collections are leading successful large-scale projects of specimen digitization (images, metadata, DNA barcodes), thereby transforming taxonomy into a big data science. Yet, little effort has been directed towards safeguarding and subsequently mobilizing the considerable amount of original data generated during the process of naming 15,000-20,000 species every year. From the perspective of alpha-taxonomists, we provide a review of the properties and diversity of taxonomic data, assess their volume and use, and establish criteria for optimizing data repositories. We surveyed 4113 alpha-taxonomic studies in representative journals for 2002, 2010, and 2018, and found an increasing yet comparatively limited use of molecular data in species diagnosis and description. In 2018, of the 2661 papers published in specialized taxonomic journals, molecular data were widely used in mycology (94%), regularly in vertebrates (53%), but rarely in botany (15%) and entomology (10%). Images play an important role in taxonomic research on all taxa, with photographs used in >80% and drawings in 58% of the surveyed papers. The use of omics (high-throughput) approaches or 3D documentation is still rare. Improved archiving strategies for metabarcoding consensus reads, genome and transcriptome assemblies, and chemical and metabolomic data could help to mobilize the wealth of high-throughput data for alpha-taxonomy. Because long-term-ideally perpetual-data storage is of particular importance for taxonomy, energy footprint reduction via less storage-demanding formats is a priority if their information content suffices for the purpose of taxonomic studies. Whereas taxonomic assignments are quasifacts for most biological disciplines, they remain hypotheses pertaining to evolutionary relatedness of individuals for alpha-taxonomy. For this reason, an improved reuse of taxonomic data, including machine-learning-based species identification and delimitation pipelines, requires a cyberspecimen approach-linking data via unique specimen identifiers, and thereby making them findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable for taxonomic research. This poses both qualitative challenges to adapt the existing infrastructure of data centers to a specimen-centered concept and quantitative challenges to host and connect an estimated $ \le $2 million images produced per year by alpha-taxonomic studies, plus many millions of images from digitization campaigns. Of the 30,000-40,000 taxonomists globally, many are thought to be nonprofessionals, and capturing the data for online storage and reuse therefore requires low-complexity submission workflows and cost-free repository use. Expert taxonomists are the main stakeholders able to identify and formalize the needs of the discipline; their expertise is needed to implement the envisioned virtual collections of cyberspecimens. [Big data; cyberspecimen; new species; omics; repositories; specimen identifier; taxonomy; taxonomic data.].
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.