ArticleICES journal of marine science : journal du conseil
Strengthening the global network for sharing of marine biological collections: recommendations for a new agreement for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.
Article in ICES journal of marine science : journal du conseil. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Living Coral Displays, Research Laboratories, and Biobanks as Important Reservoirs of Chemodiversity with Potential for Biodiscovery.Marine drugs · 2025Review
- A forgotten element of the blue economy: marine biomimetics and inspiration from the deep sea.PNAS nexus · 2022Review
- Understanding discarding in trawl fisheries: A model based demersal case study with implications for mitigating and assessing impacts.PloS one · 2022Article
- Application of biological and fisheries attributes to assess the vulnerability and resilience of tropical marine fish species.PloS one · 2021Article
- Recommendations for connecting molecular sequence and biodiversity research infrastructures through ELIXIR.F1000Research · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Biological collections are fundamental to marine scientific research and understanding of biodiversity at various scales. Despite their key importance, sample collections and the institutes that house them are often underfunded and receive comparatively little attention in the discussions associated with global biodiversity agreements. Furthermore, access to collections can be limited by inadequate systems, infrastructure, and networks. With negotiations underway for a new implementing agreement on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, marine genetic resources (MGR), including questions on the sharing of benefits, remains the most debated and contentious element. Disparities remain between States regarding access to and utilization of marine biological samples (including MGR) from areas beyond national jurisdiction. Addressing capacity gaps related to collections could provide a point of agreement during negotiations and enhance global inclusivity in access to and utilization of MGR. Here, we examine both existing capacity and regional gaps in marine collections. We propose the strengthening of a distributed network of marine biological collections, building on existing initiatives and emphasizing best practices to bridge regional gaps. Our recommendations include: promoting scientific best practice for the curation of collections; alignment with ocean observing, and sampling initiatives; a potential pairing scheme for collections in developing and developed States; raising awareness of collections and benefits to marine science including through a global registry/directory; and promoting sustainable funding mechanisms to support collections and sustain global generation of contributors and users.
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.