ReviewNature ecology & evolution2025
Guidelines for the effective and ethical sampling of herbaria.
Review in Nature ecology & evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 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
- Macroevolutionary dynamics and predictors of tropical rain forest plant diversity.Science advances · 2026Article
- The Herbarium of Paolo Boccone from the Years 1689-1695 Kept in Wrocław (Poland): Plant Nomenclature, Taxonomy and Biogeography.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Ethical collectomics: A guide to the responsible and fair mobilization of natural history collections.Bioscience · 2026Article
- The utility of herbarium collections for genetic monitoring.Bioscience · 2026Review
- Murbeckiella is dead, long live Oreophyton: origin and systematics of tribe Oreophytoneae (Brassicaceae).Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Using herbarium collections to study genetic responses to global change.The New phytologist · 2026Review
- Using reflectance spectra and Pl@ntNet to identify herbarium specimens: a case study with Lithocarpus.The New phytologist · 2026Article
- From Permits to Samples: Addressing Key Challenges for High-Quality Reference Genome Generation in Europe.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Review
- Genomic resources for crop wild relatives are critical for perennial fruit breeding and conservation.American journal of botany · 2025Review
- A curated benchmark dataset for molecular identification based on genome skimming.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Exploring biodiversity through museomics.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of herbaria for science and conservation is enabling greatly enhanced scopes and scales of discovery, exploration and protection of biodiversity. The availability of digital, open-access herbarium data is, perhaps counter-intuitively, expanding the use of physical collections by researchers who use digital collections to find specimens and then sample physical collections for multiomics investigations, including genomics, transcriptomics, metabolomics, proteomics and microbiomics. These investigations are leading to new scientific insights and supporting the development of conservation actions, but they come with a substantial cost: the partial or complete destruction of often irreplaceable specimens, which constitute a global heritage that should be permanently safeguarded for future reference. Here we provide a set of recommended best practices for the sustainable, equitable and ethical sampling of herbarium specimens. Our recommendations are intended for two complementary and partially overlapping audiences-users and stewards-who together build, use and protect herbarium collections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39333397What 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.