ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025
Museum 'dark data' show variable impacts on deep-time biogeographic and evolutionary history.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Staking out the frontiers: The limits of the metazoan shallow marine fossil record.Science advances · 2026Article
- #Yourpalaeolife: Interrogating the Status of Fieldwork Among Early Career Palaeontology Researchers.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Museum 'dark data' show variable impacts on deep-time biogeographic and evolutionary history.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The age of digitally accessible datasets has transformed palaeontology, enabling previously impossible macroevolutionary insights. However, a substantial reservoir of generally inaccessible 'dark data' resides within museum collections, which may alter our understanding of ancient groups and their ecological and evolutionary history. We demonstrate how the addition of data held exclusively in museums impacts our macroevolutionary understanding of an entire taxonomic group, using a dataset of Palaeozoic echinoids containing the majority of museum occurrences for the clade. We find that museum 'dark data' shows clear differences in composition compared to data available in the published literature and strongly impacts biogeographic patterns, increasing the average geographic range size of taxa by 35%. Global model results assessing drivers of diversity are also significantly affected by the addition of museum-only data. Conversely, 'dark data' have a more limited impact on the temporal ranges of taxa or estimates of overall diversity and are impacted by similar socio-geographic biases as the published record. These findings show that unpublished museum data are necessary to obtain a complete understanding of macroevolutionary patterns in deep-time, illustrating the importance of the collection, curation, digitization and continued care of 'dark data' in the age of 'Big Data' in palaeobiology.
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.