Evaluation of Museum Collection Data for Use in Biodiversity Assessment

Abstract

Natural‐history collections in museums contain data critical to decisions in biodiversity conservation. Collectively, these specimen‐based data describe the distributions of known taxa in time and space. As the most comprehensive, reliable source of knowledge for most described species, these records are potentially available to answer a wide range of conservation and research questions. Nevertheless, these data have shortcomings, notably geographic gaps, resulting mainly from the ad hoc nature of collecting effort. This problem has been frequently cited but rarely addressed in a systematic manner. We have developed a methodology to evaluate museum collection data, in particular the reliability of distributional data for narrow‐range taxa. We included only those taxa for which there were an appropriate number of records, expert verification of identifications, and acceptable locality accuracy. First, we compared the available data for the taxon of interest to the “background data,” comprised of records for those organisms likely to be captured by the same methods or by the same collectors as the taxon of interest. The “adequacy”of background sampling effort was assessed through calculation of statistics describing the separation, density, and clustering of points, and through generation of a sampling density contour surface. Geographical information systems (GIS) technology was then used to model predicted distributions of species based on abiotic (e.g., climatic and geological) data. The robustness of these predicted distributions can be tested iteratively or by bootstrapping. Together, these methods provide an objective means to assess the likelihood of the distributions obtained from museum collection records representing true distributions. Potentially, they could be used to evaluate any point data to be collated in species maps, biodiversity assessment, or similar applications requiring distributional information.

Diversity of Wild Palms (Arecaceae) in the Republic of Benin: Finding the Gaps in the National Inventory Combining Field and Digital Accessible Knowledge

“…Earlier, data were often safely and jealously kept by their owner (be it an individual, laboratory, or museum) and could only be accessed through remuneration of some sort, e.g. authorship (Scoble 2000;Ponder et al 2001;Wang et al 2007). However, recent advances in information technology and an increased willingness to share primary biodiversity data are enabling unprecedented access (Soberón and Peterson 2004), as in case of GBIF.…”

Online image databases as multi-purpose resources: discovery of a new host ant of Rickia wasmannii Cavara (Ascomycota, Laboulbeniales) by screening AntWeb.org

“…These biological collections could be important to reveal new geographical distributions of several species (Ponder et al 2001, Suarez and Tsutsui 2004, Solow and Roberts 2006, Pyke and Ehrlich 2010. Examining biological samples in these collections may also reveal previously unrecorded associations between different species (Frey et al 1992), e.g.…”

The utility of open-access biodiversity information in representing anurans in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest and Cerrado

“…It is not unusual for there to be a spatial bias and/or incomplete dataset for any taxonomic group included in these databases owing to sampling error, and data storage and mobilization (Yesson et al 2007, Beck et al 2014. Nevertheless, data derived from these sources are being used increasingly for purposes such as taxonomic revisions (Pennisi 2000), environmental niche modeling (Vasconcelos et al 2012), compilation of "redlists" of threatened species (Shaffer et al 1998), and biodiversity assessment (Ponder et al 2001, Yesson et al 2007 and references therein).…”