ArticleBioscience2022
Bridging the Research Gap between Live Collections in Zoos and Preserved Collections in Natural History Museums.
Article in Bioscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intraspecific Trait Variation in the Mammalian Gastrointestinal Tract: A Digestive Dive and Systematic Literature Review.Integrative and comparative biology · 2026Pooled it
- Pangolin museum genomics reveal the dynamic genetic consequences and extinction risk of the critically endangered Chinese pangolin.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- High-performance living plant collections require a globally integrated data ecosystem to meet twenty-first-century challenges.Nature plants · 2026Review
- Road to Extinction? Past and Present Population Structure and Genomic Diversity in the Koala.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Article
- The SmARTR pipeline: A modular workflow for the cinematic rendering of 3D scientific imaging data.iScience · 2024Article
- Increasing the impact of vertebrate scientific collections through 3D imaging: The openVertebrate (oVert) Thematic Collections Network.Bioscience · 2024Review
- Arctos: Community-driven innovations for managing natural and cultural history collections.PloS one · 2024Article
- A New Era of Morphological Investigations: Reviewing Methods for Comparative Anatomical Studies.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2023Review
- 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
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Zoos and natural history museums are both collections-based institutions with important missions in biodiversity research and education. Animals in zoos are a repository and living record of the world's biodiversity, whereas natural history museums are a permanent historical record of snapshots of biodiversity in time. Surprisingly, despite significant overlap in institutional missions, formal partnerships between these institution types are infrequent. Life history information, pedigrees, and medical records maintained at zoos should be seen as complementary to historical records of morphology, genetics, and distribution kept at museums. Through examining both institution types, we synthesize the benefits and challenges of cross-institutional exchanges and propose actions to increase the dialog between zoos and museums. With a growing recognition of the importance of collections to the advancement of scientific research and discovery, a transformational impact could be made with long-term investments in connecting the institutions that are caretakers of living and preserved animals.
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.