Search

The Country Compendium of the Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species (GRIIS) is a collation of data across 196 individual country checklists of alien species, along with a designation of those species with evidence of impact at a country level. The Compendium provides a baseline for monitoring the distribution and invasion status of all major taxonomic groups, and can be used for the purpose of global analyses of introduced (alien, non-native, exotic) and invasive species (invasive alien species), including regional, single and multi-species taxon assessments and comparisons. It enables exploration of gaps and inferred absences of species across countries, and also provides one means for updating individual GRIIS Checklists. The Country Compendium is, for example, instrumental, along with data on first records of introduction, for assessing and reporting on invasive alien species targets, including for the Convention on Biological Diversity and Sustainable Development Goals. The GRIIS Country Compendium provides a baseline and mechanism for tracking the spread of introduced and invasive alien species across countries globally. Design Type(s) Data integration objective ● Observation design Measurement Type(s) Alien species occurrence ● Evidence of impact invasive alien species assessment objective Technology Type(s) Agent expert ● Data collation Factor Type(s) Geographic location ● Origin / provenance ● Habitat Sample Characteristics - Organism Animalia ● Bacteria ● Chromista ● Fungi ● Plantae ● Protista (Protozoa) ● Viruses Sample Characteristics - Location Global countries

Astorga, Francisca, Groom, Quentin, Shimabukuro, Paloma Helena Fernandes, Manguin, Sylvie, Noesgaard, Daniel, Orrell, Thomas, Sinka, Marianne, Hirsch, Tim, Schigel, Dmitry (2023): Biodiversity data supports research on human infectious diseases: Global trends, challenges, and opportunities. One Health (100484) 16: 1-9, DOI: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100484, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2023.100484

Natural history collection data available digitally on the web have so far only made limited use of the potential of semantic links among themselves and with cross-disciplinary resources. In a pilot study, botanical collections of the Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities (CETAF) have therefore begun to semantically annotate their collection data, starting with data on people, and to link them via a central index system. As a result, it is now possible to query data on collectors across different collections and automatically link them to a variety of external resources. The system is being continuously developed and is already in production use in an international collection portal.

The utopian vision is of a future where a digital representation of each object in our collections is accessible through the internet and sustainably linked to other digital resources. This is a long term goal however, and in the meantime there is an urgent need to share data about our collections at a higher level with a range of stakeholders (Woodburn et al. 2020). To sustainably achieve this, and to aggregate this information across all natural science collections, the data need to be standardised (Johnston and Robinson 2002). To this end, the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) Collection Descriptions (CD) Interest Group has developed a data standard for describing collections, which is approaching formal review for ratification as a new TDWG standard. It proposes 20 classes (Suppl. material 1) and over 100 properties that can be used to describe, categorise, quantify, link and track digital representations of natural science collections, from high-level approximations to detailed breakdowns depending on the purpose of a particular implementation. The wide range of use cases identified for representing collection description data means that a flexible approach to the standard and the underlying modelling concepts is essential. These are centered around the ‘ObjectGroup’ (Fig. 1), a class that may represent any group (of any size) of physical collection objects, which have one or more common characteristics. This generic definition of the ‘collection’ in ‘collection descriptions’ is an important factor in making the standard flexible enough to support the breadth of use cases. For any use case or implementation, only a subset of classes and properties within the standard are likely to be relevant. In some cases, this subset may have little overlap with those selected for other use cases. This additional need for flexibility means that very few classes and properties, representing the core concepts, are proposed to be mandatory. Metrics, facts and narratives are represented in a normalised structure using an extended MeasurementOrFact class, so that these can be user-defined rather than constrained to a set identified by the standard. Finally, rather than a rigid underlying data model as part of the normative standard, documentation will be developed to provide guidance on how the classes in the standard may be related and quantified according to relational, dimensional and graph-like models. So, in summary, the standard has, by design, been made flexible enough to be used in a number of different ways. The corresponding risk is that it could be used in ways that may not deliver what is needed in terms of outputs, manageability and interoperability with other resources of collection-level or object-level data. To mitigate this, it is key for any new implementer of the standard to establish how it should be used in that particular instance, and define any necessary constraints within the wider scope of the standard and model. This is the concept of the ‘collection description scheme,’ a profile that defines elements such as: which classes and properties should be included, which should be mandatory, and which should be repeatable; which controlled vocabularies and hierarchies should be used to make the data interoperable; how the collections should be broken down into individual ObjectGroups and interlinked, and how the various classes should be related to each other. which classes and properties should be included, which should be mandatory, and which should be repeatable; which controlled vocabularies and hierarchies should be used to make the data interoperable; how the collections should be broken down into individual ObjectGroups and interlinked, and how the various classes should be related to each other. Various factors might influence these decisions, including the types of information that are relevant to the use case, whether quantitative metrics need to be captured and aggregated across collection descriptions, and how many resources can be dedicated to amassing and maintaining the data. This process has particular relevance to the Distributed System of Scientific Collections (DiSSCo) consortium, the design of which incorporates use cases for storing, interlinking and reporting on the collections of its member institutions. These include helping users of the European Loans and Visits System (ELViS) (Islam 2020) to discover specimens for physical and digital loans by providing descriptions and breakdowns of the collections of holding institutions, and monitoring digitisation progress across European collections through a dynamic Collections Digitisation Dashboard. In addition, DiSSCo will be part of a global collections data ecosystem requiring interoperation with other infrastructures such as the GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility) Registry of Scientific Collections, the CETAF (Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities) Registry of Collections and Index Herbariorum. In this presentation, we will introduce the draft standard and discuss the process of defining new collection description schemes using the standard and data model, and focus on DiSSCo requirements as examples of real-world collection descriptions use cases.

Invasive alien species are repeatedly shown to be amongst the top threats to biodiversity globally. Robust indicators for measuring the status and trends of biological invasions are lacking, but essential for monitoring biological invasions and the effectiveness of interventions. Here, we formulate and demonstrate three such indicators that capture the key dimensions of species invasions, each a significant and necessary advance to inform invasive alien species policy targets: 1) Rate of Invasive Alien Species Spread, which provides modelled rates of ongoing introductions of species based on invasion discovery and reporting. 2) Impact Risk, that estimates invasive alien species impacts on the environment in space and time and provides a basis for nationally targeted prioritization of where best to invest in management efforts. 3) Status Information on invasive alien species, that tracks improvement in the essential dimensions of information needed to guide relevant policy and data collection and in support of assessing invasive alien species spread and impact. We show how proximal, model-informed status and trend indicators on invasive alien species can provide more effective global (and national) reporting on biological invasions, and how countries can contribute to supporting these indicators.

Domestic and captive animals and cultivated plants should be recognised as integral components in contemporary ecosystems. They interact with wild organisms through such mechanisms as hybridization, predation, herbivory, competition and disease transmission and, in many cases, define ecosystem properties. Nevertheless, it is widespread practice for data on domestic, captive and cultivated organisms to be excluded from biodiversity repositories, such as natural history collections. Furthermore, there is a lack of integration of data collected about biodiversity in disciplines, such as agriculture, veterinary science, epidemiology and invasion science. Discipline-specific data are often intentionally excluded from integrative databases in order to maintain the “purity” of data on natural processes. Rather than being beneficial, we argue that this practise of data exclusivity greatly limits the utility of discipline-specific data for applications ranging from agricultural pest management to invasion biology, infectious disease prevention and community ecology. This problem can be resolved by data providers using standards to indicate whether the observed organism is of wild or domestic origin and by integrating their data with other biodiversity data (e.g. in the Global Biodiversity Information Facility). Doing so will enable efforts to integrate the full panorama of biodiversity knowledge across related disciplines to tackle pressing societal questions.

People are one of the best known and most stable entities in the biodiversity knowledge graph. The wealth of public information associated with people and the ability to identify them uniquely open up the possibility to make more use of these data in biodiversity science. Person data are almost always associated with entities such as specimens, molecular sequences, taxonomic names, observations, images, traits and publications. For example, the digitization and the aggregation of specimen data from museums and herbaria allow us to view a scientist’s specimen collecting in conjunction with the whole corpus of their works. However, the metadata of these entities are also useful in validating data, integrating data across collections and institutional databases and can be the basis of future research into biodiversity and science. In addition, the ability to reliably credit collectors for their work has the potential to change the incentive structure to promote improved curation and maintenance of natural history collections.

Digitisation and publication of museum specimen data is happening worldwide, but far from complete. Museums can start by sharing what they know about their holdings at a higher level, long before each object has its own record. Information about what is held in collections worldwide is needed by many stakeholders including collections managers, funders, researchers, policy-makers, industry, and educators. To aggregate this information from collections, the data need to be standardised (Johnston and Robinson 2002). So, the Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG) Collection Descriptions (CD) Task Group is developing a data standard for describing collections, which gives the ability to provide: automated metrics, using standardised collection descriptions and/or data derived from specimen datasets (e.g., counts of specimens) and a global registry of physical collections (i.e., digitised or non-digitised). automated metrics, using standardised collection descriptions and/or data derived from specimen datasets (e.g., counts of specimens) and a global registry of physical collections (i.e., digitised or non-digitised). Outputs will include a data model to underpin the new standard, and guidance and reference implementations for the practical use of the standard in institutional and collaborative data infrastructures. The Task Group employs a community-driven approach to standard development. With international participation, workshops at the Natural History Museum (London 2019) and the MOBILISE workshop (Warsaw 2020) allowed over 50 people to contribute this work. Our group organized online "barbecues" (BBQs) so that many more could contribute to standard definitions and address data model design challenges. Cloud-based tools (e.g., GitHub, Google Sheets) are used to organise and publish the group's work and make it easy to participate. A Wikibase instance is also used to test and demonstrate the model using real data. There are a range of global, regional, and national initiatives interested in the standard (see Task Group charter). Some, like GRSciColl (now at the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)), Index Herbariorum (IH), and the iDigBio US Collections List are existing catalogues. Others, including the Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities (CETAF) and the Distributed System of Scientific Collections (DiSSCo), include collection descriptions as a key part of their near-term development plans. As part of the EU-funded SYNTHESYS+ project, GBIF organized a virtual workshop: Advancing the Catalogue of the World's Natural History Collections to get international input for such a resource that would use this CD standard. Some major complexities present themselves in designing a standardised approach to represent collection descriptions data. It is not the first time that the natural science collections community has tried to address them (see the TDWG Natural Collections Description standard). Beyond natural sciences, the library community in particular gave thought to this (Heaney 2001, Johnston and Robinson 2002), noting significant difficulties. One hurdle is that collections may be broken down into different degrees of granularity according to different criteria, and may also overlap so that a single object can be represented in more than one collection description. Managing statistics such as numbers of objects is complex due to data gaps and variable degrees of certainty about collection contents. It also takes considerable effort from collections staff to generate structured data about their undigitised holdings. We need to support simple, high-level collection summaries as well as detailed quantitative data, and to be able to update as needed. We need a simple approach, but one that can also handle the complexities of data, scope, and social needs, for digitised and undigitised collections. The data standard itself is a defined set of classes and properties that can be used to represent groups of collection objects and their associated information. These incorporate common characteristics ('dimensions') by which we want to describe, group and break down our collections, metrics for quantifying those collections, and properties such as persistent identifiers for tracking collections and managing their digital counterparts. Existing terms from other standards (e.g. Darwin Core, ABCD) are re-used if possible. The data model (Fig. 1) underpinning the standard defines the relationships between those different classes, and ensures that the structure as well as the content are comparable across different datasets. It centres around the core concept of an 'object group', representing a set of physical objects that is defined by one or more dimensions (e.g., taxonomy and geographic origin), and linked to other entities such as the holding institution. To the object group, quantitative data about its contents are attached (e.g. counts of objects or taxa), along with more qualitative information describing the contents of the group as a whole. In this presentation, we will describe the draft standard and data model with examples of early adoption for real-world and example data. We will also discuss the vision of how the new standard may be adopted and its potential impact on collection discoverability across the collections community.

A deep irony of COVID-19 likely originating from a bat-borne coronavirus (Boni et al. 2020) is that the global lockdown to quell the pandemic also locked up physical access to much basic knowledge regarding bat biology. Digital access to data on the ecology, geography, and taxonomy of potential viral reservoirs, from Southeast Asian horseshoe bats and pangolins to North American deer mice, was suddenly critical for understanding the disease's emergence and spread. However, much of this information lay inside rare books and personal files rather than as open, linked, and queryable resources on the internet. Even the world's experts on mammal taxonomy and zoonotic disease could not retrieve their data from shuttered laboratories. We were caught unprepared. Why, in this digitally connected age, were such fundamental data describing life on Earth not already freely accessible online? Understanding why biodiversity science was unprepared—and how to fix it before the next pandemic—has been the focus of our COVID-19 Taskforce since April 2020 and is continuing (organized by CETAF and DiSSCo). We are a group of museum-based and academic scientists with the goal of opening the rich ecological data stored in natural history collections to the research public. This information is rooted in what may seem an unlikely location—taxonomic names and their historical usages, which are the keys for searching literature and extracting linked ecological data (Fig. 1). This has been the core motivation of our group, enabled by the pioneering efforts of Plazi (Agosti and Egloff 2009) to build tools for literature digitization, extraction, and parsing (e.g., Synospecies, Ocellus) without which biodiversity science would be even less prepared. Our group led efforts to build an additional pipeline from Plazi to the Biodiversity Literature Repository at Zenodo, a free and unlimited data repository (Agosti et al. 2019), and then to GloBI, an open-source database of biotic interactions (Poelen et al. 2014, GloBI 2020). We also developed a direct integration from Pensoft Journals to GloBI, leveraging that publisher’s indexing of computer-readable terms (called semantic metadata; Senderov et al. 2018) to extract mammal host and virus information. Overall, considerable progress was made. In total, 85,492 new interactions were added to GloBI from 14 April to 21 May 2020 (see entire dataset on Zenodo: Poelen et al. 2020). Of those, 28,839 interactions are present when subset to "hasHost", "hostOf", "pathogenOf", "virus", and 4,101 unique name combinations are present after considering mammal species synonymies (from Meyer et al. 2015). Of those interactions, 892 species of mammals and 1,530 unique virus names are involved, which compares to 754 mammals and 586 viruses in the most recent data synthesis (Olival et al. 2017). While these liberated data may still include redundancies, they demonstrate the value of our approach and the expanse of known but digitally unconnected data that remains locked in publications. We can liberate host-virus data from publications, but doing so is expensive and does not scale to the continued influx of new articles that are inadequately digitized. Our efforts make it clear that Pensoft-style semantic publishing should be expanded to all major journals. The pandemic has created an opportunity for re-thinking the way we do science in the digital age. Thankfully, our future is not the past, so we do not have to keep wasting resources to digitially 'rediscover' biodiversity knowledge. We collectively call for changes to the publishing paradigm, so that research findings are directly accessible, citable, discoverable, and reusable for creating complete forms of digital knowledge.

Species checklists are a crucial source of information for research and policy. Unfortunately, many traditional species checklists vary wildly in their content, format, availability and maintenance. The fact that these are not open, findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) severely hampers fast and efficient information flow to policy and decision-making that are required to tackle the current biodiversity crisis. Here, we propose a reproducible, semi-automated workflow to transform traditional checklist data into a FAIR and open species registry. We showcase our workflow by applying it to the publication of the Manual of Alien Plants, a species checklist specifically developed for the Tracking Invasive Alien Species (TrIAS) project. Our approach combines source data management, reproducible data transformation to Darwin Core using R, version control, data documentation and publication to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). This checklist publication workflow is openly available for data holders and applicable to species registries varying in thematic, taxonomic or geographical scope and could serve as an important tool to open up research and strengthen environmental decision-making.

To improve the suitability of the Darwin Core standard for the research and management of alien species, the standard needs to express the native status of organisms, how well established they are and how they came to occupy a location. To facilitate this, we propose: 1. To adopt a controlled vocabulary for the existing Darwin Core term dwc:establishmentMeans 2. To elevate the pathway term from the Invasive Species Pathways extension to become a new Darwin Core term dwc:pathway maintained as part of the Darwin Core standard 3. To adopt a new Darwin Core term dwc:degreeOfEstablishment with an associated controlled vocabulary These changes to the standard will allow users to clearly state whether an occurrence of a species is native to a location or not, how it got there (pathway), and to what extent the species has become a permanent feature of the location. By improving Darwin Core for capturing and sharing these data, we aim to improve the quality of occurrence and checklist data in general and to increase the number of potential uses of these data.

The EU BON (“Building the European Biodiversity Observation Network”) project has made important contributions towards the achievement of global conservation targets. This infographic illustrates EU BON's contributions towards the achievement of Aichi Biodiversity Target 19 "By 2020, knowledge, the science base and technologies relating to biodiversity, its values, functioning, status and trends, and the consequences of its loss, are improved, widely shared and transferred, and applied.”

The present paper describes policies and guidelines for scholarly publishing of biodiversity and biodiversity-related data, elaborated and updated during the Framework Program 7 EU BON project, on the basis of an earlier version published on Pensoft's website in 2011. The document discusses some general concepts, including a definition of datasets, incentives to publish data and licenses for data publishing. Further, it defines and compares several routes for data publishing, namely as (1) supplementary files to research articles, which may be made available directly by the publisher, or (2) published in a specialized open data repository with a link to it from the research article, or (3) as a data paper, i.e., a specific, stand-alone publication describing a particular dataset or a collection of datasets, or (4) integrated narrative and data publishing through online import/download of data into/from manuscripts, as provided by the Biodiversity Data Journal. The paper also contains detailed instructions on how to prepare and peer review data intended for publication, listed under the Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers, respectively. Special attention is given to existing standards, protocols and tools to facilitate data publishing, such as the Integrated Publishing Toolkit of the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF IPT) and the DarwinCore Archive (DwC-A). A separate section describes most leading data hosting/indexing infrastructures and repositories for biodiversity and ecological data.

Citizen science is an approach of public participation in scientific research which has gained significant momentum in recent years. This is particularly evident in biology and environmental sciences where input from citizen scientists has greatly increased the number of publicly available observation data. However, there are still challenges in effective networking, data sharing and securing data quality. EU BON project has analyzed the citizen science landscape in Europe with regards to biodiversity research and proposes several policy recommendations. One of the recommendations is a Pan-European citizen science gateway for biodiversity data with dedicated tools for data collection and management. The prototypes of the gateway components are part of the EU BON biodiversity portal and described in current report.

The LinBi project aims to enhance the discoverability of digitized objects from natural history collections hosted by institutes all over Europe. This enhancement is achieved by publishing new and enriched content to the Europeana collections platform. The use of simple vocabularies and machine-readable metadata encourages reuse and has the additional advantage of facilitating the clustering of interesting content for user groups beyond biodiversity and natural history researchers. Linking the collections of Europe together in an openly-available platform and sharing our common cultural and natural heritage with a broad audience will increase the public’s awareness of biodiversity collections. Furthermore, it will help us reach out to new user groups such as teachers, journalists and artists, who were previously unaware of, or distant from, our collections. Suitable content was selected and harmonized for interlinking with Europeana. Contributions include a large quantity of herbarium sheets, digitized glass plate negatives taken between 1880 and 1930 and a portrait collection dating from the late 19th and early 20th century. With the help of the DoeDat crowdsourcing platform, existing metadata were enriched and mobilized to allow for publication in the form of open linked data. The integration of geographical data and common names allows the Europeana platform to link scientific specimens with literature and fine art from different collections and to guide users to interesting and inspiring content via themed virtual exhibitions. One such theme is composed of content from the "Wild Roses of Crépin" collection, which will be enriched by pictures of living plants, herbarium specimens and illustrations old and modern. A second content cluster consists of an enriched and curated collection of botanical illustrations originating from a corpus of special and rare books ranging from the 15th to 19th centuries. Careful curation increases the potential for re-use and provides additional oppertunities for the general public to interact with this collection. The LinBi platform has the long-term ambition of forming a sustainable and open source solution integrated into the Europeana Core Service. This will further improve cooperation between institutes by building international infrastructure and networks, thus contributing to a more open cross-border society.

BackgroundOxalis corniculataL. is a weed with a world-wide distribution and unknown origin. Though it belongs to a section of the genus from South America, the evidence that this species came from there is weak.MethodsWe reviewed the evidence for the origin ofO. corniculatausing herbarium specimens, historic literature and archaeobotanical research. We also summarized ethnobotanical literature to understand where this species is most used by humans as a medicine.ResultsDespite numerous claims that it is native to Europe there is no strong evidence thatO. corniculataoccurred in Europe before the 15th century. Nor is there reliable evidence that it occurred in North or South America before the 19th century. However, there is direct archaeobotanical evidence of it occurring in south–east Asia at least 5,000 years ago. There is also evidence from historic literature and archaeobotany that it reached Polynesia before European expeditions explored these islands. Examination of the traditional use ofO. corniculatademonstrates that is most widely used as a medicine in south–east Asia, which, while circumstantial, also points to a long association with human culture in this area.DiscussionThe most likely origin forO. corniculatais south–east Asia. This is consistent with a largely circum-Pacific distribution of sectionCorniculataeofOxalis. Nevertheless, it is likely thatO. corniculataspread to Europe and perhaps Polynesia before the advent of the modern era through trade routes at that time.

Natural history collections represent a vast and superb wealth of information gathered and curated across centuries by institutions such as natural history museums and botanical gardens around the world. The relatively recent advent and maturation of accessible computer technology has allowed the initiation of major digitization projects aimed at making the contents of these collections publicly available for education and research purposes. The final destinations of these newly digitized data are public biodiversity data repositories, of which, GBIF is the main one. These respositories are gateways where researchers can access and retrieve the data for use in a wide range of analyses. This unprecedented volume of information on biodiversity represents an extraordinary asset for research in ecology and evolution. A particularly important part of the digitized data for any given specimen is its collection location, as it indirectly gives information on the species’ habitat and thus, its ecological requirements. Many specimens in natural history collections come from a time where the collecting event, which includes the location information, was hand-written on physical tags attached to the specimen. This location information was given as a description of a place, e.g. a site name, and could be a rather precise or vague description. In order to convert this description of locality into a digitized research-grade georeferenced record, the research community has come up with a set of guidelines and recommendations; the most prominent one the point-radius method devised by Wieczorek et al. in 2004. However, and despite the public availability of this know-how, the end result is that the data available at the end of the pipeline, e.g. GBIF, often lacks georeferencing information with enough quality to be used for research purposes. Occurrence records from natural history collection datasets held at GBIF, often lack spatial coordinates and, if present, in most cases their precision and uncertainty fields are blank. The final consequence of this lack of complete georeferencing information is that the affected records are rendered useless for many kinds of research. For example, the flourishing field of species distribution modelling absolutely depends on accurate spatial information in order to be able to retrieve information on the environmental conditions in which the species live. The availability of global environmental and remote sensing datasets together with the sophisticated geospatial tools at the disposal of the researcher become powerless if no quality geoinformation is available. In this study, we perform a preliminary analysis on the status and availability of geoferencing information in datasets originated from specimens in natural history collections held at GBIF, discuss how the quality of this spatial info may affect ecological research, and conclude with some recommendations on how to better describe the georeferencing process within public digital biodiversity repositories.

Large quantities of biodiversity data are required to assess the current status of species, to identify drivers of population and distributional change, and to predict changes to biodiversity under future scenarios. Nevertheless, currently-available data are often not well-suited to these purposes. To highlight existing gaps, we assess the availability of species observation data in Europe, their geographic and temporal range, and their quality. We do so by reviewing the most relevant sources for European biodiversity observation data, and identifying important barriers to filling gaps. We suggest strategies, tools and frameworks to continue to fill these gaps, in addition to producing data suitable for generating Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs). Our review of data sources shows that only around a third of data-providers provide unrestricted data access. Particularly large geographic gaps exist in Eastern European countries and many datasets are not suitable for generating EBVs due to the absence of long-term data. We highlight examples built on recent experiences from large data integrators, publishers and networks that help to efficiently improve data availability, adopt open science principles and close existing data gaps. Future strategies must urgently consider the needs of relevant data stakeholders, particularly science- and policy-related needs, and provide incentives for data-providers. Hence, sustainable, long-term infrastructures and a European biodiversity network are needed to provide such efficient workflows, incentives for data-provision and tools.

Can Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) be developed to monitor changes in species interactions? That was the difficult question asked at the GLOBIS-B workshop in February, 2017 in which >50 experts participated. EBVs can be defined as harmonized measurements that allow us to inform policy about essential changes in biodiversity. They can be seen as biological state variables from which more refined indicators may be derived. They have been presented as a means to monitor global biodiversity change and as a concept to drive the gathering, sharing, and standardisation of data on our biota (Geijzendorffer et al. 2015, Kissling et al. 2017, Pereira et al. 2013). There are different classes of EBVs that characterize, for example, the state of species populations, species traits and ecosystem structure and function. It has also been proposed that there should be EBVs related to species interactions. However, until now there has been little progress formulating what these should be, even though species interactions are central to ecology. Species interactions cover a wide range of important processes, from mutualisms, such as pollination, to different forms of heterotrophic nutrition, such as the predator-prey relationship. Indeed, ecological interactions are critical to understand why an ecosystem is more than the sum of its parts. Nevertheless, direct observation of species interactions is often difficult and time consuming work, which makes it difficult to monitor them in the long-term. For this reason the workshop focused on those species interactions that are feasible to study and are most relevant to policy. To bring focus to our discussions we concentrated on pollination, predation and microbial interactions. Taking pollination as an example, there was recognition of the importance of ecological networks and that network metrics may be a sensitive indicator of change. Potential EBVs might be the number of pairwise interactions between species or the modularity and interaction diversity of the whole network. This requires standardised data collection and reporting (e.g. standardization of measures of interaction strength or minimum data specifications for ecological networks) and sufficient data across time to regularly calculate these metrics. Other simpler surrogates for pollination might also prove useful, such as flower visitation rates or the proportion of fruit set. Finally, there was a recognition that we do not yet have enough tools to monitor some important interactions. Many interactions, particular among microbes, can currently only be inferred from the co-occurrence of taxa. However, technology is rapidly developing and it is possible to foresee a future where even these interactions can be monitored efficiently. Species interactions are essential to understanding ecology, but they are also difficult to monitor. Yet, delegates at the workshop left with a positive outlook that it is valuable to develop standardisation and harmonization of species interaction data to make them suitable for EBV production.

With biodiversity research activities being increasingly shifted to the web, the need for a system of persistent and stable identifiers for physical collection objects becomes increasingly pressing. The Consortium of European Taxonomic Facilities agreed on a common system of HTTP-URI-based stable identifiers which is now rolled out to its member organizations. The system follows Linked Open Data principles and implements redirection mechanisms to human-readable and machine-readable representations of specimens facilitating seamless integration into the growing semantic web. The implementation of stable identifiers across collection organizations is supported with open source provider software scripts, best practices documentations and recommendations for RDF metadata elements facilitating harmonized access to collection information in web portals. Database URL : http://cetaf.org/cetaf-stable-identifiers.

Aim – Paper-based publications were the main repository for phytogeographical information until the end of the 20 th century. These texts are still an important reference source for phytogeography and potentially a valuable source of data for research on environmental change. The recent digitization of biodiversity publications, text-mining and mark-up protocols means that these data are now more accessible than ever before. Here I examine the value of legacy literature specifically for studies on phytogeography. Methods – Three contrasting data mobilisation projects are used as case studies for the extraction of phytogeographic data. Two were digitisations and XML mark-up of floras, the Flore d'Afrique Centrale from the 20 th century and the Flora of Northumberland and Durham from the 19 th century. A third case study used Chenopodium vulvaria L. as a test case, where I attempted to recover as much phytogeographic data as possible for one species, both from literature and from herbarium specimens. Results – A large amount of useful information was extractable from legacy literature. The main limitations are that most localities need georeferencing and that observations are only rarely associated with a precise date. In the case of C. vulvaria literature contributed about 20% of all available observations of the species. Literature becomes a progressively more important source of data the further back in time one looks. However, useful observations become much rarer earlier than about 1850. Main conclusions – Sourcing phytogeographic data from legacy literature is valuable. It contains observations and links to other data that are unavailable from any other source. Nevertheless, its extraction takes a substantial investment in time. Before commencing on such a project it is important to prioritise work and understand the limitations of such data, particularly with regard to georeferencing.

Errors in botanical surveying are a common problem. The presence of a species is easily overlooked, leading to false-absences; while misidentifications and other mistakes lead to false-positive observations. While it is common knowledge that these errors occur, there are few data that can be used to quantify and describe these errors. Here we characterise false-positive errors for a controlled set of surveys conducted as part of a field identification test of botanical skill. Surveys were conducted at sites with a verified list of vascular plant species. The candidates were asked to list all the species they could identify in a defined botanically rich area. They were told beforehand that their final score would be the sum of the correct species they listed, but false-positive errors counted against their overall grade. The number of errors varied considerably between people, some people create a high proportion of false-positive errors, but these are scattered across all skill levels. Therefore, a person’s ability to correctly identify a large number of species is not a safeguard against the generation of false-positive errors. There was no phylogenetic pattern to falsely observed species, however, rare species are more likely to be false-positive as are species from species rich genera. Raising the threshold for the acceptance of an observation reduced false-positive observations dramatically, but at the expense of more false negative errors. False-positive errors are higher in field surveying of plants than many people may appreciate. Greater stringency is required before accepting species as present at a site, particularly for rare species. Combining multiple surveys resolves the problem, but requires a considerable increase in effort to achieve the same sensitivity as a single survey. Therefore, other methods should be used to raise the threshold for the acceptance of a species. For example, digital data input systems that can verify, feedback and inform the user are likely to reduce false-positive errors significantly.

Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) are measurements required for study, reporting, and management of biodiversity change. They are being developed to support consistency, from the collection to the reporting of biodiversity data at the national, regional and global scales. However, "EBV stakeholders" need to strike a balance between 'doing innovative research' and 'having positive impact' on biodiversity management decisions. This paper reports on a workshop entitled Identifying joint pathways to address the challenges of biodiversity data provision and decision-making and presents the main workshop’s output, a “researcher’s brief” entitled Guiding principles for promoting the application of EBVs for current and future needs of decision-makers. These guiding principles are: Speak with a common voice; Clearly define what is an EBV and how it relates to indicators; Engage beyond the research world; Be realistic about what can be done now and later; Define criteria for good EBVs; Use EBV as a clearing house; Convey the limitations of EBVs; Clarify what impact EBVs should have; Be salient, credible, legitimate, iterative; Don't put an EBV skin on everything you do; Don't create too many EBVs; and Don't reduce EBVs to building blocks of indicators. This brief is of relevance to the wider GEO BON (Group on Earth Observation Biodoversity Observation Network) community, and in particular those scientists/researchers interested in the application of EBVs., published version, nonPeerReviewed

2nd Freshwater Invasives - Networking for Strategy II (FINS-II) Conference -- JUL 11-14, 2016 -- Zagreb, CROATIA Skora, Michal Edward/0000-0002-9121-1318; Groom, Quentin/0000-0002-0596-5376; Lukas, Juliane/0000-0003-3336-847X; Skora, Michal/0000-0002-9121-1318; Piria, Marina/0000-0001-6324-9282; Smith, Emily/0000-0003-2767-9933; Simonovic, Predrag/0000-0002-4819-4962; Pastorino, Paolo/0000-0002-0585-1168; Koutsikos, Nicholas/0000-0003-0680-4504; Vilizzi, Lorenzo/0000-0001-8103-885X; Dobrzycka-Krahel, Aldona/0000-0002-4252-895X; Tarkan, Ali Serhan/0000-0001-8628-0514 WOS: 000412582000002 Invasive alien species (IAS) are a significant and growing problem worldwide. In Europe, some aspects of IAS have been addressed through existing legal instruments, but these are far from sufficient to tackle the problem comprehensively. The FINS II Conference considered the relevance of Top 20 IAS issues (Top 10 threats and opportunities) for Europe determined at the 1st Freshwater Invasiveness-Networking for Strategy (FINS I) conference held in Ireland in 2013. Using a similar format of sequential group voting, threats from FINS I (lack of funding, of awareness and education; poor communication) and several new threats (lack of lead agencies, of standardized management and of common approach; insufficient monitoring and management on private property) were identified by 80 academics, applied scientists, policy makers and stakeholders from 14 EU and three non-EU countries (including 10 invited speakers) during four workshop break-out sessions (legislation remit in both EU/non-EU countries; best management and biosecurity practice for control; data management and early warning; pathways of introductions and citizen science). Identified opportunities include improved cooperation and communication, education and leadership to enhance public awareness and stakeholder participation, systems establishment for early detection, rapid response, monitoring and management of IAS using standardised methods of data collection, storage and usage. The sets of threats and opportunities identified underline the importance of international cooperation on IAS issues in communication, education and funding as priorities, as well as in standardization of legislation, control methods and best practise of research. Univ Zagreb, European Inland Fisheries & Aquaculture Advisory Commiss University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture; European Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Commission (EIFAAC); Croatian Biological Society; Ministry of Science; Education and Sport of Republic of Croatia; Croatian Association of Sports Fishing Societies; Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Nature Conservation Committee [NEC04932]; Natural Environment Research CouncilNERC Natural Environment Research Council [NEC04932]; UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural AffairsDepartment for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA); Irish EPA project "Prevention, control and eradication of invasive alien species" [2015-NC-MS-4]; Topfishing; Zagreb ZOO; Zagreb; Karlovac towns We wish to thank the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, the European Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Commission (EIFAAC), the Croatian Biological Society, the Ministry of Science, the Education and Sport of Republic of Croatia, the Croatian Association of Sports Fishing Societies, the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Topfishing, Zagreb ZOO, Zagreb and Karlovac towns for sponsoring the FINS II conference. We also thank the large number of people who assisted but are not co-authors on the manuscript including M. Pofuk, T. Stuhne, R. Jasarevic, K. Culag, I. Cuze, M. Cvitanic and S. Hudina for their selfless assistance during the conference. H.E. Roy received support from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and the Natural Environment Research Council (via National Capability funding to the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, project NEC04932), and G.H. Copp was supported by the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. COST Action TD1209 ALIEN Challenge is acknowledged. F. Lucy, J. Caffrey, J. Dick, E. Davis and N. Coughlan were supported by the Irish EPA project "Prevention, control and eradication of invasive alien species" (2015-NC-MS-4).

International audience; 1. There is a high demand for biodiversity observation data to inform conservation and environmental policy, and citizen scientists generate the vast majority of terrestrial biodiversity observations. As this work is voluntary, many people assume that these data are openly available for use in conservation and scientific research.2. Here, the openness of biodiversity observation data that are contributed to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility is examined by the data provider. Contrary to what many people assume, data sets from volunteers are among the most restrictive in how they can be used.3. Policy implications. The assumption that voluntary data collection leads to data sharing does not recognize the wishes and motivations of those who collect data, nor does it respect the crucial contributions of these data to long‐term monitoring of biodiversity trends. To improve data openness, citizen scientists should be recognized in ways that correspond with their motivations. Furthermore, organizations that manage these data should make their data sharing policies open and explicit.

A fundamental constituent of a biodiversity observation network is the technological infrastructure that underpins it. The European Biodiversity Network project (EU BON) has been working with and improving upon pre-existing tools for data mobilization, sharing and description. This paper provides conceptual and practical advice for the use of these tools. We review tools for managing metadata, occurrence data, and ecological data and give detailed description of these tools, their capabilities and limitations. This is followed by recommendations on their deployment and possible future enhancements. This is done from the perspective of the needs of the biodiversity observation community with a view to the development of a unified user interface to these data – the European Biodiversity Portal (EBP). We described the steps taken to develop, adapt, deploy and test these tools. This document also gives an overview of the objectives that still need to be achieved and challenges to be addressed for the remainder of the project., The authors acknowledge the support of the EU BON project (http://www.eubon.eu), funded by the EU Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement № 308454.

In order to preserve the variety of life on Earth, we must understand it better. Biodiversity research is at a pivotal point with research projects generating data at an ever increasing rate. Structuring, aggregating, linking and processing these data in a meaningful way is a major challenge. The systematic application of information management and engineering technologies in the study of biodiversity (biodiversity informatics) help transform data to knowledge. However, concerted action is required to be taken by existing e-infrastructures to develop and adopt common standards, provisions for interoperability and avoid overlapping in functionality. This would result in the unification of the currently fragmented landscape that restricts European biodiversity research from reaching its full potential. The overarching goal of this COST Action is to coordinate existing research and capacity building efforts, through a bottom-up trans-disciplinary approach, by unifying biodiversity informatics communities across Europe in order to support the long-term vision of modelling biodiversity on earth. BioUnify will: 1. specify technical requirements, evaluate and improve models for efficient data and workflow storage, sharing and re-use, within and between different biodiversity communities; 2. mobilise taxonomic, ecological, genomic and biomonitoring data generated and curated by natural history collections, research networks and remote sensing sources in Europe; 3. leverage results of ongoing biodiversity informatics projects by identifying and developing functional synergies on individual, group and project level; 4. raise technical awareness and transfer skills between biodiversity researchers and information technologists; 5. formulate a viable roadmap for achieving the long-term goals for European biodiversity informatics, which ensures alignment with global activities and translates into efficient biodiversity policy.

Background It is obvious to anyone studying plants in the landscape that man-made environmental change is having profound effects on the abundance, distribution and composition of plant communities. Nevertheless, quantifying these changes and estimating the impact of the different drivers of change is extremely difficult. Botanical surveying can potentially provide insights to the changes that are occurring and inform decisions related to conservation, agriculture and forestry policy. However, much of botanical surveying is conducted in such a way that it is not comparable between dates and places. Any comparison of historical and modern data has to account for biases in the recording of different taxonomic groups, geographic biases and varying surveying effort in time. In 2010 botanical recorders in the Vice Counties of Durham and South Northumberland in the United Kingdom decided to conduct a four year survey specifically to benchmark the abundance and distribution of common plants in their counties. It is intended that this survey will provide a relatively unbiased assessment with which to compare future and past surveys of the area and a means to study the drivers of biodiversity change in the North-east of England. New information This survey of Durham and South Northumberland has been designed with two goals, firstly to provide information on common vascular plant species and secondly to provide a dataset that will be versatile with respect to the sorts of questions that can be answered with the data. The survey is primarily an occupancy study of 1km2 grid squares, however, observers were also asked to provide a relative abundance estimate of the species in each grid square. The collection of relative abundance estimate data was an experiment to assess the repeatablity and useablity of such estimates.

All around the globe, humans have greatly altered the abiotic and biotic environment with ever-increasing speed. One defining feature of the Anthropocene epoch(1,2) is the erosion of biogeographical barriers by human-mediated dispersal of species into new regions, where they can naturalize and cause ecological, economic and social damage(3). So far, no comprehensive analysis of the global accumulation and exchange of alien plant species between continents has been performed, primarily because of a lack of data. Here we bridge this knowledge gap by using a unique global database on the occurrences of naturalized alien plant species in 481 mainland and 362 island regions. In total, 13,168 plant species, corresponding to 3.9% of the extant global vascular flora, or approximately the size of the native European flora, have become naturalized somewhere on the globe as a result of human activity. North America has accumulated the largest number of naturalized species, whereas the Pacific Islands show the fastest increase in species numbers with respect to their land area. Continents in the Northern Hemisphere have been the major donors of naturalized alien species to all other continents. Our results quantify for the first time the extent of plant naturalizations worldwide, and illustrate the urgent need for globally integrated efforts to control, manage and understand the spread of alien species.

The labels on herbarium specimens hold information on the plant collected, but also on the botanist. Recent digitisation allows these data to be used for many types of investigation, including study of the botanists themselves. As a proof of concept, we reconstructed prosopographical networks of botanical exchange that existed in Britain and Ireland in the nineteenth and twentieth century and investigate the nature of these networks and their actors. Data from British Herbaria digitised on Herbaria@home were used to create network diagrams from the names of collectors, determiners, communicators and curators mentioned on herbarium specimens collected from 1856 to 1932. Data from herbarium specimens credibly reconstructed botanical exchange networks. These networks provided metrics on the actors in botanical exchange and can be used to quantify the role of different categories of actor. The botanical networks of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century were shown to be highly connected and d...

This study demonstrates the value of legacy literature and historic collections as a source of data on environmental history. Chenopodium vulvaria L. has declined in northern Europe and is of conservation concern in several countries, whereas in other countries outside Europe it has naturalised and is considered an alien weed. In its European range it is considered native in the south, but the northern boundary of its native range is unknown. It is hypothesised that much of its former distribution in northern Europe was the result of repeated introductions from southern Europe and that its decline in northern Europe is the result of habitat change and a reduction in the number of propagules imported to the north. A historical analysis of its ecology and distribution was conducted by mining legacy literature and historical botanical collections. Text analysis of habitat descriptions written on specimens and published in botanical literature covering a period of more than 200 years indicate that the habitat and introduction pathways of C. vulvaria have changed with time. Using the non-European naturalised range in a climate niche model, it is possible to project the range in Europe. By comparing this predicted model with a similar model created from all observations, it is clear that there is a large discrepancy between the realized and predicted distributions. This is discussed together with the social, technological and economic changes that have occurred in northern Europe, with respect to their influence on C. vulvaria.

Concern about biodiversity loss has led to increased public investment in conservation. Whereas there is a\ud widespread perception that such initiatives have been unsuccessful, there are few quantitative tests of this\ud perception. Here, we evaluate whether rates of biodiversity change have altered in recent decades in three\ud European countries (Great Britain, Netherlands and Belgium) for plants and flower visiting insects. We\ud compared four 20-year periods, comparing periods of rapid land-use intensification and natural habitat loss\ud (1930–1990) with a period of increased conservation investment (post-1990). We found that extensive species\ud richness loss and biotic homogenisation occurred before 1990, whereas these negative trends became\ud substantially less accentuated during recent decades, being partially reversed for certain taxa (e.g. bees in\ud Great Britain and Netherlands). These results highlight the potential to maintain or even restore current\ud species assemblages (which despite past extinctions are still of great conservation value), at least in regions\ud where large-scale land-use intensification and natural habitat loss has ceased.

Recent upperward migration of plants and animals along altitudinal gradients and poleward movement of animal range boundaries have been confirmed by many studies. This phenomenon is considered to be part of the fingerprint of recent climate change on the biosphere. Here I examine whether poleward movement is occurring in the vascular plants of Great Britain. The ranges of plants were determined from detection/non-detection data in two periods, 1978 to 1994 and 1995 to 2011. From these, the centre of mass of the population was calculated and the magnitude and direction of range shifts were determined from movements of the centre of mass. A small, but significant, northward movement could be detected in plants with expanding ranges, but not among declining species. Species from warmer ranges were not more likely to be moving northward, nor was dispersal syndrome a predictor of migration success. It is concluded that simply looking at northward movement of species is not an effective way to identify the effect of climate change on plant migration and that other anthropogenic changes obscure the effect of climate.

Observations reported by citizens are crucial to the ability of scientists to inform policy on biodiversity. This is particularly relevant in the case of preventing and controlling biological invasions; that is, the introduction and spread of species outside their natural ranges as a consequence of human activity. Such invasions of natural ecosystems represent one of the main threats to biodiversity, economy, and human well-being globally, and policies on tackling this issue require a strong evidence base that increasingly is built on citizen science. Many citizens are motivated to collect data for their own interest, while presumably, few expect to make a major impact on policy. The needs of policy-makers are not always aligned with the approaches used by citizens to collect and share data. Therefore, how can we motivate citizen science for the needs of policy without compromising the enjoyment that citizens gain from collecting biodiversity observations? How can policy-makers support citizens to collect the data they need? Solutions require two components, a combination of social and technological innovation. Initiatives aimed at supporting decision-making processes should involve more societal actors and be built in a more collaborative or even co-created manner with citizens, scientists, and policy-makers. Technological solutions can be achieved through regular, rapid, and open publication of biodiversity data products. We envisage frequent publication of maps and indicators from rapidly mobilized data, with clear pointers to gaps in knowledge. Improving the links between data collection and delivery of policy-relevant information demonstrates – to citizens and their organizations – the need for their data, and gives them a clear view on the impact of their data on policy. This visibility also empowers stakeholder organizations in the policy development process.

Background The systematic analysis of a large number of comparable plant trait data can support investigations into phylogenetics and ecological adaptation, with broad applications in evolutionary biology, agriculture, conservation, and the functioning of ecosystems. Floras, i.e., books collecting the information on all known plant species found within a region, are a potentially rich source of such plant trait data. Floras describe plant traits with a focus on morphology and other traits relevant for species identification in addition to other characteristics of plant species, such as ecological affinities, distribution, economic value, health applications, traditional uses, and so on. However, a key limitation in systematically analyzing information in Floras is the lack of a standardized vocabulary for the described traits as well as the difficulties in extracting structured information from free text. Results We have developed the Flora Phenotype Ontology (FLOPO), an ontology for describing traits of plant species found in Floras. We used the Plant Ontology (PO) and the Phenotype And Trait Ontology (PATO) to extract entity-quality relationships from digitized taxon descriptions in Floras, and used a formal ontological approach based on phenotype description patterns and automated reasoning to generate the FLOPO. The resulting ontology consists of 25,407 classes and is based on the PO and PATO. The classified ontology closely follows the structure of Plant Ontology in that the primary axis of classification is the observed plant anatomical structure, and more specific traits are then classified based on parthood and subclass relations between anatomical structures as well as subclass relations between phenotypic qualities. Conclusions The FLOPO is primarily intended as a framework based on which plant traits can be integrated computationally across all species and higher taxa of flowering plants. Importantly, it is not intended to replace established vocabularies or ontologies, but rather serve as an overarching framework based on which different application- and domain-specific ontologies, thesauri and vocabularies of phenotypes observed in flowering plants can be integrated. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13326-016-0107-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.