Статья

Widespread sampling biases in herbaria revealed from large‐scale digitization

Barnabas H. DaruDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University Cambridge MA 02138 USADaniel ParkEvolutionary Genomics (United States)Richard B. PrimackBiology Department Boston University Boston MA 02215 USACharles G. WillisDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University Cambridge MA 02138 USADavid S. BarringtonPringle Herbarium Plant Biology Department University of Vermont Torrey Hall, 27 Colchester Ave Burlington VT 05405 USATimothy J. S. WhitfeldBrown University Herbarium Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Brown University 34 Olive Street, Box G‐B225 Providence RI 02912 USATristram G. SeidlerBiology Department University of Massachusetts 611 North Pleasant Street Amherst MA 01003 USAPatrick W. SweeneyDivision of Botany Peabody Museum of Natural History Yale University New Haven CT 06511 USADavid R. FosterHarvard Forest Harvard University 324 North Main Street Petersham MA 01366 USAAaron M. EllisonHarvard Forest Harvard University 324 North Main Street Petersham MA 01366 USACharles C. DavisDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University Cambridge MA 02138 USA

2017en

ABI

Аннотация

Nonrandom collecting practices may bias conclusions drawn from analyses of herbarium records. Recent efforts to fully digitize and mobilize regional floras online offer a timely opportunity to assess commonalities and differences in herbarium sampling biases. We determined spatial, temporal, trait, phylogenetic, and collector biases in c. 5 million herbarium records, representing three of the most complete digitized floras of the world: Australia (AU), South Africa (SA), and New England, USA (NE). We identified numerous shared and unique biases among these regions. Shared biases included specimens collected close to roads and herbaria; specimens collected more frequently during biological spring and summer; specimens of threatened species collected less frequently; and specimens of close relatives collected in similar numbers. Regional differences included overrepresentation of graminoids in SA and AU and of annuals in AU; and peak collection during the 1910s in NE, 1980s in SA, and 1990s in AU. Finally, in all regions, a disproportionately large percentage of specimens were collected by very few individuals. We hypothesize that these mega-collectors, with their associated preferences and idiosyncrasies, shaped patterns of collection bias via 'founder effects'. Studies using herbarium collections should account for sampling biases, and future collecting efforts should avoid compounding these biases to the extent possible.

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

DOI: 10.1111/nph.14855

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 2Использованных источников: 0

Показатели — AkademScholar