6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

      Publish your biodiversity research with us!

      Submit your article here.

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Globally distributed occurrences utilised in 200 spider species conservation profiles (Arachnida, Araneae)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract
          Background

          Data on 200 species of spiders were collected to assess the global threat status of the group worldwide. To supplement existing digital occurrence records from GBIF, a dataset of new occurrence records was compiled for all species using published literature or online sources, from which geographic coordinates were extracted or interpreted from locality description data.

          New information

          A total of 5,104 occurrence records were obtained, of which 2,378 were from literature or online sources other than GBIF. Of these, 2,308 had coordinate data. Reporting years ranged from 1834 to 2017. Most records were from North America and Europe, with Brazil, China, India and Australia also well represented.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences

          Studying and protecting each and every living species on Earth is a major challenge of the 21st century. Yet, most species remain unknown or unstudied, while others attract most of the public, scientific and government attention. Although known to be detrimental, this taxonomic bias continues to be pervasive in the scientific literature, but is still poorly studied and understood. Here, we used 626 million occurrences from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), the biggest biodiversity data portal, to characterize the taxonomic bias in biodiversity data. We also investigated how societal preferences and taxonomic research relate to biodiversity data gathering. For each species belonging to 24 taxonomic classes, we used the number of publications from Web of Science and the number of web pages from Bing searches to approximate research activity and societal preferences. Our results show that societal preferences, rather than research activity, strongly correlate with taxonomic bias, which lead us to assert that scientists should advertise less charismatic species and develop societal initiatives (e.g. citizen science) that specifically target neglected organisms. Ensuring that biodiversity is representatively sampled while this is still possible is an urgent prerequisite for achieving efficient conservation plans and a global understanding of our surrounding environment.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The seven impediments in invertebrate conservation and how to overcome them

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Species conservation profiles of a random sample of world spiders I: Agelenidae to Filistatidae

              Abstract Background The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the most widely used information source on the extinction risk of species. One of the uses of the Red List is to evaluate and monitor the state of biodiversity and a possible approach for this purpose is the Red List Index (RLI). For many taxa, mainly hyperdiverse groups, it is not possible within available resources to assess all known species. In such cases, a random sample of species might be selected for assessment and the results derived from it extrapolated for the entire group - the Sampled Red List Index (SRLI). With the current contribution and the three following papers, we intend to create the first point in time of a future spider SRLI encompassing 200 species distributed across the world. New information A sample of 200 species of spiders were randomly selected from the World Spider Catalogue, an updated global database containing all recognised species names for the group. The 200 selected species where divided taxonomically at the family level and the familes were ordered alphabetically. In this publication, we present the conservation profiles of 46 species belonging to the famillies alphabetically arranged between Agelenidae and Filistatidae , which encompassed Agelenidae , Amaurobiidae , Anyphaenidae , Araneidae , Archaeidae , Barychelidae , Clubionidae , Corinnidae , Ctenidae , Ctenizidae , Cyatholipidae , Dictynidae , Dysderidae , Eresidae and Filistatidae .
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Biodivers Data J
                Biodivers Data J
                1
                urn:lsid:arphahub.com:pub:f9b2e808-c883-5f47-b276-6d62129e4ff4
                urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:245B00E9-BFE5-4B4F-B76E-15C30BA74C02
                Biodiversity Data Journal
                Pensoft Publishers
                1314-2828
                2019
                02 April 2019
                : 7
                : e33264
                Affiliations
                [1 ] LIBRe - Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research, Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland LIBRe - Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research, Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki Helsinki Finland
                [2 ] IUCN SSC Spider & Scorpion Specialist Group, Helsinki, Finland IUCN SSC Spider & Scorpion Specialist Group Helsinki Finland
                [3 ] Georgetown University, Department of Biology, Washington, DC, United States of America Georgetown University, Department of Biology Washington, DC United States of America
                [4 ] University College London, London, United Kingdom University College London London United Kingdom
                [5 ] University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, Green Bay, United States of America University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Green Bay United States of America
                [6 ] University of Venda, Thohoyandou, South Africa University of Venda Thohoyandou South Africa
                [7 ] University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom University of Nottingham Nottingham United Kingdom
                [8 ] Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia Universidad Nacional de Colombia Bogotá Colombia
                [9 ] Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States of America Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University Cambridge United States of America
                [10 ] cE3c - Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes, University of the Azores, Angra do Heroísmo, Portugal cE3c - Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes, University of the Azores Angra do Heroísmo Portugal
                [11 ] University of Indianapolis, Indianapolis, United States of America University of Indianapolis Indianapolis United States of America
                [12 ] Canterbury Museum, Christchurch, New Zealand Canterbury Museum Christchurch New Zealand
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Pedro Cardoso ( pedro.cardoso@ 123456helsinki.fi ).

                Academic editor: Pavel Stoev

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3589-9699
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9195-2562
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4237-0117
                Article
                33264 10497 urn:lsid:arphahub.com:pub:cf261d57-ddaa-5ff1-a3f9-ac2243b029e1
                10.3897/BDJ.7.e33264
                6477866
                98a869ea-b10c-4685-830c-2470533916b0
                Pedro Cardoso, Vaughn Shirey, Sini Seppälä, Sergio Henriques, Michael L Draney, Stefan Foord, Alastair T Gibbons, Luz A Gomez, Sarah Kariko, Jagoba Malumbres-Olarte, Marc Milne, Cor J Vink

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 22 January 2019
                : 27 March 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 8, Tables: 0, References: 8
                Categories
                Data Paper (Biosciences)
                Araneae
                Zoology & Animal Biology
                Biodiversity & Conservation
                Cenozoic
                World

                arthropoda ,bibliography search,iucn,threat status
                arthropoda , bibliography search, iucn, threat status

                Comments

                Comment on this article