Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37877102›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2023

The nature of science: The fundamental role of natural history in ecology, evolution, conservation, and education.

Karma Nanglu, Danielle de Carle, Thomas M Cullen, Erika B Anderson, Suchinta Arif, Rowshyra A Castañeda, Lucy M Chang, Rafael Eiji Iwama, Erica Fellin, Regine Claire Manglicmot and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Identifying hotspots of faunal data deficiency to direct urgent research and monitoring.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

12 authors.

Karma NangluMuseum of Comparative Zoology and Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Harvard University Cambridge Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0595-2225
Danielle de CarleDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada.
Thomas M CullenDepartment of Geosciences Auburn University Auburn Alabama USA.
Erika B AndersonThe Hunterian University of Glasgow Glasgow UK.
Suchinta ArifDepartment of Biology Dalhousie University Halifax Nova Scotia Canada.
Rowshyra A CastañedaEcosystems and Ocean Sciences Pacific Region, Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sidney British Columbia Canada.
Lucy M ChangCalifornia Science Center Los Angeles California USA.
Rafael Eiji IwamaDepartamento de Genética e Biologia Evolutiva, Instituto de Biociências Universidade de São Paulo São Paulo Brazil.
Erica FellinDepartment of Biology McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada.
Regine Claire ManglicmotDepartment of Zoology The University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada.
Melanie D MasseyDepartment of Biology Dalhousie University Halifax Nova Scotia Canada.
Viviana Astudillo-ClavijoEcology and Evolutionary Biology University of Michigan Ann Arbor Michigan USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a contemporary trend in many major research institutions to de-emphasize the importance of natural history education in favor of theoretical, laboratory, or simulation-based research programs. This may take the form of removing biodiversity and field courses from the curriculum and the sometimes subtle maligning of natural history research as a "lesser" branch of science. Additional threats include massive funding cuts to natural history museums and the maintenance of their collections, the extirpation of taxonomists across disciplines, and a critical under-appreciation of the role that natural history data (and other forms of observational data, including Indigenous knowledge) play in the scientific process. In this paper, we demonstrate that natural history knowledge is integral to any competitive science program through a comprehensive review of the ways in which they continue to shape modern theory and the public perception of science. We do so by reviewing how natural history research has guided the disciplines of ecology, evolution, and conservation and how natural history data are crucial for effective education programs and public policy. We underscore these insights with contemporary case studies, including: how understanding the dynamics of evolutionary radiation relies on natural history data; methods for extracting novel data from museum specimens; insights provided by multi-decade natural history programs; and how natural history is the most logical venue for creating an informed and scientifically literate society. We conclude with recommendations aimed at students, university faculty, and administrators for integrating and supporting natural history in their mandates. Fundamentally, we are all interested in understanding the natural world, but we can often fall into the habit of abstracting our research away from its natural contexts and complexities. Doing so risks losing sight of entire vistas of new questions and insights in favor of an over-emphasis on simulated or overly controlled studies.

Indexed as

biodiversityconservation biologyearth sciencesequitymuseumspolicyscience educationtaxonomyundergraduate education

Identifiers

PMID37877102
PMCPMC10591213

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.