ArticleScience advances2025
How little we've seen: A visual coverage estimate of the deep seafloor.
Article in Science advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global distribution of deep-sea natural products shows environmental and phylogenetic undersampling with potential for biodiscovery.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- UVMulti: A Large-scale Benchmark Dataset for Underwater Video-level Multi-task Learning.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Looking beyond the vent to the environmental seascapes shaping deep-sea hydrothermal ecosystems.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Global Deep Sea Exploration Goals: A representative approach to visually observing the deep seafloor.Science advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Integrated ocean governance is needed in the Southwest Atlantic Ocean to foster fisheries, conservation and resilience to climate change.Discover Oceans · 2026Review
- Chemoarchitectural studies of the rat hypothalamus and zona incerta.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Methane-munching symbionts fuel sea spiders in the deep sea.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the importance of visual observation in the ocean, we have imaged a minuscule fraction of the deep seafloor. Sixty-six percent of the entire planet is deep ocean (≥200 m), and our data show that we have visually observed less than 0.001%, a total area approximately a tenth of the size of Belgium. Data gathered from approximately 44,000 deep-sea dives indicate that we have also seen an incredibly biased sample. Sixty-five percent of all in situ visual seafloor observations in our dataset were within 200 nm of only three countries: the United States, Japan, and New Zealand. Ninety-seven percent of all dives we compiled have been conducted by just five countries: the United States, Japan, New Zealand, France, and Germany. This small and biased sample is problematic when attempting to characterize, understand, and manage a global ocean.
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.