NEKOLA, Jeffrey Clark, Benjamin T. HUTCHINS, Alison SCHOFIELD, Briante NAJEV a Kathryn E. PEREZ. Caveat consumptor notitia museo: Let the museum data user beware. Global Ecology and Biogeography. Blackwell Science, 2019, roč. 28, č. 12, s. 1722-1734. ISSN 1466-822X. Dostupné z: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/geb.12995.
Další formáty:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Základní údaje
Originální název Caveat consumptor notitia museo: Let the museum data user beware
Autoři NEKOLA, Jeffrey Clark (840 Spojené státy, garant, domácí), Benjamin T. HUTCHINS (840 Spojené státy), Alison SCHOFIELD (840 Spojené státy), Briante NAJEV (840 Spojené státy) a Kathryn E. PEREZ (840 Spojené státy).
Vydání Global Ecology and Biogeography, Blackwell Science, 2019, 1466-822X.
Další údaje
Originální jazyk angličtina
Typ výsledku Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor 10511 Environmental sciences
Stát vydavatele Spojené státy
Utajení není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
WWW URL
Impakt faktor Impact factor: 6.446
Kód RIV RIV/00216224:14310/19:00112019
Organizační jednotka Přírodovědecká fakulta
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/geb.12995
UT WoS 000484852800001
Klíčová slova anglicky body size; data mining; misidentification; museum records; sampling bias; specimen labelling error
Štítky rivok
Příznaky Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změnil Změnila: Mgr. Marie Šípková, DiS., učo 437722. Změněno: 28. 3. 2020 13:54.
Anotace
Issue Lot accession information from natural history collections represents a potentially vital source of large datasets to test biodiversity, biogeography and macroecology hypotheses. But does such information provide an accurate portrayal of the natural world? We review the many types of bias and error intrinsic to museum collection data and consider how these factors may affect their ability to accurately test ecological hypotheses. Evidence We considered all Texas land snail collections from the two major repositories in the state and compared them with an ecological sample drawn across the same landscape. We found that museum collection localities were biased in favour of regions with higher human population densities and iconic destinations. They also tended to be made during attractive temporal windows. Small, uncharismatic taxa tended to be under-collected while larger, charismatic species were over-collected. As a result, for most species it was impossible to use museum lot frequency to accurately predict frequency and abundance in an ecological sample. Species misidentification rate was approximately 20%, while 4% of lots represented more than one species. Errors were spread across the entire shell size spectrum and were present in 75% of taxonomic families. Contingency table analysis documented significant dependence of both misidentification and mixed lot rates upon shell size and family richness. Conclusion Researchers should limit their use of museum record data to situations where their inherent biases and errors are irrelevant, rectifiable or explicitly considered. At the same time museums should begin incorporating expert specimen verification into their digitization programs.
VytisknoutZobrazeno: 7. 9. 2024 22:24